BTW, since warfare is going to be a thing and I doubt every layman is knowledgeable about this thing, here's a brief summary on weapons, units and a bit of on the tactics used during this period.

First off, the musket.
The dominating weapon during this era which will only rise in importance as time marches on. The most popular firing mechanism is the flintlock which actually has several variants but it generally doesn't matter. What you'd rather wish to know is that how effective are these in combat, right?
Well, it fires a ball about 10 times heavier than an assault rifle bullet. These things are nasty and one hit anywhere is guaranteed to incapacitate the enemy (even if they don't die). Are they inaccurate as the myth says? Depends. Volley fires were tended to be at 30-50m in order to maximize their power but otherwise muskets can semi-accurately shoot for 160 meters and the musket ball can kill from even 300 meters away. It's possible to reach better accuracy with a tight-fitting ball but snug projectiles made the barrels foul with unburnt powder much faster so it was useless for massed armies. As for rate of fire, it depends on training and a tiny bit on the quality of equipment. The speed of volleys depended on the slowest reloading soldier in your fire team. So worst case was one per minute while the best shooters can perform 4 shots under the same time. Some Napoleonic sources state 6 but that was a century later and only expected during training.
Muskets vs armor? Muskets didn't actually made armor obsolete, just less convenient. The so-called "musket-proof" armors were thick (5-8mm) and contained 2-3 different layers pressed together. These were heavy so they only protected the vitals and in case of riders the horse was pretty much exposed. As such armor will steadily go out of fashion as we progress in the 18th century here. Armor can save your life but not with complete certainty. Still, it does give a considerable headache for gunmen trying to shoot you down.
Lastly, with the invention of gun bayonets your musketeers are effectively also pikemen and if the situation calls for it you can use them as such. Though the tendency of thinner formations did reduce their effectiveness in this role. Yet as time goes on the gunmen will rel more and more on their firearms instead of anything else and the tactic of a well-timed volley can stop many kinds of threats.

Second, the cannons.
While nowhere as good as their modern or WW2 counterparts, artillery was a valuable asset not only during sieges but also within the battlefield. The classic cannons you see in various media are pretty much these. They are big metal tubes usually firing solid iron balls. They could be devastating on hit and with a bit of luck (and misfortune to the enemy) they bounced, increasing their path of lethality further. Basically think of Bowling but made sickeningly brutal, that's the contemporary cannonball in action. The range of these cannons were around 600-700 meters but certain unique pieces could fire for twice as far. Worths noting though that many armies preferred to shoot from 200-250 meters as this improved the cannons' lethality to a considerable degree. Aside from solid balls the cannon could fire multitude of creatively designed projectiles, you can look them up [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cannon_projectiles]here[/url].
Firing with cannons was no easy thing, though. It required lot of technical skill, finely refined gunpowder and a list of other things. In a way you can measure a nation's wealth and technical development by the number and quality of their cannons. Cannons were shot by two means, linstock and gunlocks. Linstock is using a long slowmatch rod to directly ignite the primer, the matchlock of cannons. Fittingly with this theme the gunlocks use a flintlock mechanism. Technically the gunlocks were only really introduced in 1745 but in effect they aren't much different from flintlock so you may get them earlier.

Third, units.
Just because your army uses guns it doesn't mean everybody has the same role. the overwhelming bulk of your infantry will be made of the line soldiers, that is the guys who stand in line tightly packed lines and fire. Next important element are the skirmishers. Skirmisher can be both a general term for harassers or mean a specific role. Skirmishers move ahead of the main army. They have lighter equipment for this reason and move in loose formation. They try to break the enemy's lines by attacking from the flank and even often use cover for safety. Skirmishers are rather exposed to cavalry attacks. Around this time nations also began using sharpshooters, skilled soldiers who may use better guns (early rifles, airguns, etc) with better fitting loads to shoot from further away. Sharpshooters/marksmen were rare for obvious reasons. Lastly, there are the grenadiers. During mid 17th century many nations tried using thrown bombs and for this role they recruited the most physically fit soldiers. Early grenades were a failure but the grenadier role stayed as elite assault units. 
Cavalry had many variations, too. Guns made firing lines dominate the battlefields yet the speed and power of cavalry charges was valuable if timed right. They also used guns (generally pistols and shortened muskets) but they were less accurate and generally it only softened up the target for a cavalry charge. Heavy cavalry still existed but the changes would trend to lighter units in the future. Aside from firing on horseback there's also the dragoons who use horses but dismount prior to combat and fight on foot.

So yeah, on paper a 17th century battle ma look simple. In effect the tactics were about mind games.
I hope my long text above was helpful.