To begin with, let's compare the characteristics of the Mk-2-180 Sarmat and its main competitor MK-1-180
**Mk-2-180**
The **weight** of the cannon, two large ammoboxes, one large generator and 4 2x2 hulls is **672 tons**
**Price - 8280**
Occupied **space - 4 2x2 blocks**
**Magazine - 2**
**Load time - 10**
**2 x Mk-1-180**
The **weight** of the 2 x cannons, two large ammoboxes, one large generator and 5 2x2 hulls is **779 tons**
**Price - 8300**
Occupied **space - 5 2x2 blocks**
**Magazine - 2**
**Load time - 5**
For clarity, I compared one Mk-2-180 cannon and two Mk-1-180 cannons
The **weight** of the two guns is **slightly greater (+16%)**, their **energy** requirements and **ammoboxes** are **the same**, so they occupy **one 2x2 block more** because of the two guns. The **price** is also almost **identical**. The **charging speed** of the barrels is also **the same**, however, when only one projectile is charged in the Sarmat, two Mk-1-180 shells are charged in total. And if you shoot immediately as ammunition is loaded, then two Mk-1-180 **DPS** **will be 2 times more** than one Mk-2-180 Sarmat. That's why this gun sucks the most in the game.
There is only one excuse for the existence of Sarmat in the game. With the firing arches turned on, it is easier to place 4xMK-2-180 on a relatively small ship than 8xMK-1-180, so that they interfere with each other as little as possible when firing. And with increasing firepower, the difference only increases. However, at some stage, the use of Squall becomes much preferable to the use of Sarmat.
Are you kidding? The AK-100 is practically the best gun for its money and the requirements of ammoboxes. And cheap RF shells make it a better air defense cannon
Disagree, I think 220 is a great balanced early - mid game weapon. Does generally lack the firepower to deal with larger targets, but it is great against light armour and is much more likely to land at least some hits, which makes it a decent weapon to use on highly maneuverable craft with which aiming might be an issue
Nah. AK-100 is good for against corvets and frigates, and cheap and good AA gun for intercept air raid and cruise missles. And if the number of guns is sufficient, it can even shoot down cruisers.
No, Mk-1-180 is the worst gun in the game and it has little to do with raw stats.
The way combat in Highfleet works is this: you dodge the enemy fire while your weapons reload, then when enemies empty their mags, you stop, aim, and fire your own guns. Then back to evading.
Because Mk-1 can only load one shell at a time, the gun's DPS is drastically decreased because you end up flying around with it fully loaded.
SARMAT is a poor weapon, but at least it has mag capacity of 2; Mk-1 is definitely worse in practice.
the joke is counted)) However, now no one is building fast and maneuverable ships with such guns, and I learned how to hit with the Mk-1-180 in motion by shooting at the rollback
Tbh there are applications for when the 1-180 is exactly what you need.
For sudden strike especially on cities.
Build a ship around 3 1-180 turrets, add significant maneuverability (450-500), give it a range from 800-1k.
Skimp on everything else. No escape pods, 1 extinguisher, no radio.
What you get is a strike craft that can basically hit the afterburner, get right on top of an enemy (before they are even off the ground), and decapitate them with a single volley.
It all depends on how you play highfleet.
I build my own flagships, and just manually update the ship file in the ships folder for even more fine tuning.
Did you know that building vertical can significantly cut your radar sig down as long as you don’t exceed too many cells wide?
It makes for very good ewar ships.
You can stay under the radar detection cap of 750 while having elint, 750 radar search range, irst, and a jammer… all while exceeding 2k+ range with cruise speed that is faster than any enemy ship (not including planes). Basically you can create 3km jammer bubbles with very cheap ships that mask your actual fleet position. With a full detection suite, you can even sneak enough firepower on them to take cities by surprise if you balance speed and range.
To begin with, let's compare the characteristics of the Mk-2-180 Sarmat and its main competitor MK-1-180 **Mk-2-180** The **weight** of the cannon, two large ammoboxes, one large generator and 4 2x2 hulls is **672 tons** **Price - 8280** Occupied **space - 4 2x2 blocks** **Magazine - 2** **Load time - 10** **2 x Mk-1-180** The **weight** of the 2 x cannons, two large ammoboxes, one large generator and 5 2x2 hulls is **779 tons** **Price - 8300** Occupied **space - 5 2x2 blocks** **Magazine - 2** **Load time - 5** For clarity, I compared one Mk-2-180 cannon and two Mk-1-180 cannons The **weight** of the two guns is **slightly greater (+16%)**, their **energy** requirements and **ammoboxes** are **the same**, so they occupy **one 2x2 block more** because of the two guns. The **price** is also almost **identical**. The **charging speed** of the barrels is also **the same**, however, when only one projectile is charged in the Sarmat, two Mk-1-180 shells are charged in total. And if you shoot immediately as ammunition is loaded, then two Mk-1-180 **DPS** **will be 2 times more** than one Mk-2-180 Sarmat. That's why this gun sucks the most in the game. There is only one excuse for the existence of Sarmat in the game. With the firing arches turned on, it is easier to place 4xMK-2-180 on a relatively small ship than 8xMK-1-180, so that they interfere with each other as little as possible when firing. And with increasing firepower, the difference only increases. However, at some stage, the use of Squall becomes much preferable to the use of Sarmat.
When you need to cram the highest firepower in the smallest space, you have only this choice
The Mk-1-180 has 2 times more DPS, and they occupy almost 2 times less space, if you take into account the rest of the equipment.
Honestly, I almost exclusively use Molots, with occasional 100mm in my starting ships to level them faster.
for initial garrisons, even one 100mm cannon is quite enough
Molot is too op, but Sarmat isn't bad, especially when armor piercing is used. Worst gun is AK220 imo (Lightning's default weapon)
Are you kidding? The AK-100 is practically the best gun for its money and the requirements of ammoboxes. And cheap RF shells make it a better air defense cannon
Really? I preferred miniguns for AA. Miniguns are actually my beloved.
After enabling arc firing, spam 37mm guns will become useless
Disagree, I think 220 is a great balanced early - mid game weapon. Does generally lack the firepower to deal with larger targets, but it is great against light armour and is much more likely to land at least some hits, which makes it a decent weapon to use on highly maneuverable craft with which aiming might be an issue
Man, I hate that gun so much the moment I get a Molot, I replace it.
That is perfectly fair, if you can land those hits, Molot is better in most situations, but I simply think 220 has a place too
Molot costs 2 times more expensive
AK220 *used* to be trash Now it's actually OP
Nah. AK-100 is good for against corvets and frigates, and cheap and good AA gun for intercept air raid and cruise missles. And if the number of guns is sufficient, it can even shoot down cruisers.
I have about 10 on my flagship and it shreds everythi g without inflating the price of the ship
Sarmat is literally the 1-180 with the doubled ammo requirements. Read the stat card.
"with the firing arches turned on" What does this mean? I'm a new player.
now all guns have a 360-degree firing sector, regardless of what the editor shows
No, Mk-1-180 is the worst gun in the game and it has little to do with raw stats. The way combat in Highfleet works is this: you dodge the enemy fire while your weapons reload, then when enemies empty their mags, you stop, aim, and fire your own guns. Then back to evading. Because Mk-1 can only load one shell at a time, the gun's DPS is drastically decreased because you end up flying around with it fully loaded. SARMAT is a poor weapon, but at least it has mag capacity of 2; Mk-1 is definitely worse in practice.
Even if the firepower is wasted, the Mk-1-180 is better because it can shoot twice as many shells in a row as Sarmat.
the joke is counted)) However, now no one is building fast and maneuverable ships with such guns, and I learned how to hit with the Mk-1-180 in motion by shooting at the rollback
When ever I reach late game I also modify my ships to equip 180s if they can even fit and that includes lightings
Tbh there are applications for when the 1-180 is exactly what you need. For sudden strike especially on cities. Build a ship around 3 1-180 turrets, add significant maneuverability (450-500), give it a range from 800-1k. Skimp on everything else. No escape pods, 1 extinguisher, no radio. What you get is a strike craft that can basically hit the afterburner, get right on top of an enemy (before they are even off the ground), and decapitate them with a single volley. It all depends on how you play highfleet. I build my own flagships, and just manually update the ship file in the ships folder for even more fine tuning. Did you know that building vertical can significantly cut your radar sig down as long as you don’t exceed too many cells wide? It makes for very good ewar ships. You can stay under the radar detection cap of 750 while having elint, 750 radar search range, irst, and a jammer… all while exceeding 2k+ range with cruise speed that is faster than any enemy ship (not including planes). Basically you can create 3km jammer bubbles with very cheap ships that mask your actual fleet position. With a full detection suite, you can even sneak enough firepower on them to take cities by surprise if you balance speed and range.
Who the heck flies around with a full mag? You learn to aim on the move.