In PS1 bases were well defendable, mainly due to the bottle neck nature of the wall's gate, the turrets and the time it took to reach the wall or a turret. In PS2 bases with walls have the same overall design but are missing a few key things to making them defensible. Right now anything but a biolab can be taken in a matter of minutes and biolabs are only different because each entry point to the bases interior are bottle necks by design hence why they become a farm fest. Turrets exist as one of the primary defenses to attacking vehicles but in PS2 most attacking forces make it to a base before defenders can get to a turret to make use of it, especially when the attacking force is primarily air. As it stands now in most cases it takes too long to make it to turret in time to try and prevent the enemy from reaching the walls because once the attacking force makes it to the wall, or even worse inside, the wall and the turrets are essentially useless or just can't be reached to be used. In PS1 walls were connected to the main base structure via bridges hence making it easier for infantry to actually get to the wall. This helped them avoid any armor inside the courtyard but it left them vulnerable to air and snipers so it was a balanced base mechanic with a risk and reward. Atleast with the tunnels being planned for amp stations and tech plants walls will become a little more accessible now. PS1 also featured turrets that automatically fired on approaching vehicles and enemies that fired upon them. This helped defenders by giving them time to mount a defense before the enemy force destroyed the only thing preventing them from rushing the base. Since turrets in PS2 can't react to a threat themselves they become extremely easy targets for attacking forces to pick off without any care while there is no one is inside to use them. Sadly, most turrets get destroyed for the free points and not because it could potentially cause harm to your vehicle if not dealt with. If the turrets could automatically aquire targets themselves then it would greatly help solve quite a few game problems such as ghost capping (so some guy cant fly an ESF into the base unchallenged), structures with turrets would take longer to capture hence drawing combat out making it more enjoyable and preventing an entire platoon from drop podding on a base unscathed and unchallenged. As a side note: what is the point of drop pods being able to take damage and move mid air if players can't even anticipate them to shoot them down? This seems like a 'dead' (dead as in unused or or not thought of regularly) mechanic to me. It would be better if a computer could control the AA turrets to shoot drop pods at least so then theirs a risk/reward to drop podding onto an enemy base.
We had defensible bases, in this game, and in release. The tears here about how difficult they were to take were epic, and they were made easier for the attacking force to overwhelm. The current PS2 audience (overwhelmingly) does not have the patience to come up with and utilize tactics in order to overcome a good defense. That said, multi-day interlink sieges were not fun, in my opinion. I just don't get where the fun lies in crouching at the end of a long hallway, spam weapon trained on a door, waiting for some motion at the other end to signal the time to press mouse 1.
PS2 bases are defendable. The issue is that every base has 1 tier of defense. You can not hold an amp station if the enemy has the walls.
