Noob_Guardian

i meant the C-2 "troublemaker", i get the numbers mixed up. my bad Merged. The issue with that is then it becomes much more effective at range as well. Look at the one odin series smg which gains accuracy on fire. It goes from "maybe" a decent 15m kill, then just melts people at 30-40m. This isn't bad in the ODIN case, as it's got both a high ttk and high stk and doing so is balanced for it (and that one is my favorit odin smg). But with other smg's that would be much more of an issue, imagine making the accuracy of the PMG better (*throws up a little*). Making the OCA be even more accurate (After they already buffed its accuracy once with the TTK) to the suggested level, would cause a balance issue. If it's that much of an issue, using an fbw or .45 would be a better option if pushing a corner, but most times, rushing a corner leaner is a death sentence to begin even using a rifle or pistol. Hence why you generally grenade corners, or go for a flank/corner where an enemy "isn't" and ambush whoever's doing the rotation there. It'd be honestly dumb if SMG's could easily and accurately kill someone who's got "5 inches" of body out of a corner while leaning. Less bloom on NTEC would mean that it can kill you *faster* at 50m. Most guns are balanced by using the bloom and the recovery to inflate the ttk with the accuracy. As such reducing bloom, ALSO reduces said ttk, which is intentionally made to be an approximate length for certain distances. That could become an issue on a number of weapons, like the ntec, other weapons like the star, it may not be so much of one. But I don't believe that's a good idea. Atac was nerfed within a month or so of it being released. I personally didn't think it was "too powerful" but it had been nerfed by a 1stk, im not sure of any other changes that happened to it.

I'm not saying the NTEC was powercreeped, the NTEC would fall under "too versatile". Powercreeped would have been like C-9, ATAC, Nano, and a few others that got nerfed after they came out. Ah, okay makes sense. Yeah the initial statement kinda sounded like you "wanted" powercreep and im like whuuuut bruh. I don't want weapons being completely overnerfed. Most of the changes i've ever suggested for nerfing have been minor changes, i don't want to see weapons go from like... NTEC power level to ODIN series powerlevel. (That would be BAD)

They weren't moving in the right direction though? Most of the weapons that needed and got nerfed were far too effective in comparison to literally "every" weapon within their role, and at the same time the problem weapons took over other weapons which should have had a clear advantage over it within their niches. Mechanics from these weapons also broke them more than necessary. Sprint shooting borked the game's player location determining system, so that you would be firing on someone, and not hit them because they weren't actually there. Jump shooting to pixel shoot someone at 80+m crouched behind cover. the list goes on... Powercreep should be limited at all times. Powercreep is not something good. A lot of games end up powercreeping and it messes up the game balance extremely bad, and every "new" weapon just gets stronger and stronger until it forces PTW. The objective of balance is to reduce powercreep, and maintain a good balance across the board, so that players have "options" not "must haves". That there is the problem that people have with nerfing these weapons that are too powerful, too versatile, or powercreeped. APB's design team has stated multiple times already, that they intend to have players have viable options, NOT must haves. If this means nerfing NTEC, or reducing the intial buff on the PMG, and doing things like removing jump shooting, so be it. Not every weapon should be a laser, and not every weapon should at all times hit its min ttk. Fire most weapons full auto in rl and you'd have worse recoil and worse accuracy than what your make believe "APB bloom and recoil" indicate.

Many of the weapons needed changed sooner, it's just as you know, G1 was lazy and didn't make changes quickly. It took 2 years AFTER it was discovered the jumpshot accuracy was a bug in the weapons code, for the scout before they fixed it. They took 4+years to fix simple locations and make them easier to break. They left other weapons completely underpowered for 4-5+years. Do you reaaally think that "it's been this way 9 years" means it shouldn't be changed? We get it, you hate change. Merged. Weapons in APB shouldn't be pinpoint accurate. While I can somewhat understand your aggravation, there's literally zero reason to have every weapon be lasers. RNG can be aggravating at times, however most times i've encountered where "omg i should have gotten that kill he's in my reticule", was because bad server performance not because "omg rng". APB isn't COD or CSGO or other games. As such it's game mechanics don't revolve around "spray with near pinpoint accuracy". Sounds like the PMG just kept missing you and didn't have you in his reticule, not rng. Those "more accurate than other meta" weapons tended to be overpowered in some fashion or another, whether it be because qsing, jumpshooting, sprint shooting, accuracy, or damage. Might I suggest that you try to get better rather than relying on a weapon to carry you? I don't know what game you played back before car surf and car spawners. However I was still heavily spawn pushed back then, mostly it was specific clans like RAOV charging spawns and hunting them down til your team spawned up to 500m from the objective but it was pretty common back then. Such tactics only became easier because of car spawners and torch. The only way to counter such tactics is to double team the pusher, or to destroy the vehicle. Another method is to get into a building before you're seen or choose a better spawn if possible. This "issue" isn't going to go away until the players doing so either quit playing, or people adapt to punish such tactics to the point where it's not worth it. Your choice. How then would people know if they are using a weapon wrong? If you don't brick wall them and the weapon remains effective, then there's litterally no reason not to use the weapon "outside" of its niche at all times.

True, and car spawners make this issue much worse. WTF is german fortress? However that balcony has been needing fixed forever by simon. Those areas could be fixed like TENG had been easily, hopefully we see that sometime. G1 had done it a little, but they ended up hosing additional changes because the difficulty it feels like. (They fixed the place by bloodroses in fin, and made a car spawner disappear for ages) Teams only ever stick to 2v1 and 3v1 because it means they can easily kill people with minimal losses. It has nothing to do with negating RNG, as it does "taking out an enemy quickly". I've never charged 2v1 or 3v1 at someone thinking "oh crap gotta stop my teamate from dying due to RNG." No, it's "there's an enemy here take him out". Weapon accuracy is fine, stop trying to full auto weapons like they're lasers and it won't be an issue. APB FORCES you to burst and tap fire at range. It does so for a reason, and whining about it because you can't figure that reason out is dumb. You're not meant to hit the min ttk for rifles at their max damage distance. Maybe it wouldn't have been nerfed if it was actually balanced and fun to play *against*. People seem to forget that aspect of balance as well. You can claim somethings balanced all day, but if no one likes playing against it, and feel they have to use it as well just to compete and do "decent" then it's not as balanced as you claim. Oh no, how dare the meta not be what it's been for 7+years, how boring. The weapon balance is pretty good aside from a the small list of problem weapons that have always either been too powerful upon release, buffed too much, or completely under powered on release. Here on Jericho we still see lots of different weapons, pmg is still used over the OCA most cases by certain people, however OCA's still exist, there's still a number of other weapons being used. If you're salty about that car play, might i suggest not sitting on the roads? Or concs? or you know, any other explosive method that doesn't mean being dumb and letting enemies rush you? If APB is about "competition" and "competing" then why not compete and find new ways to "compete" against your servers "stale" meta? Rather than just choosing to die by standing on the road all day. NTEC is still so called "competitive" and it's still used a lot on Jericho, i've seen a handful of more stars and fars as well, as well as obeyas. Most weapons as newbie and F2P still have the same strengths and weaknesses. If it's not working now it's not because they nerfed the "ntec". The "NTEC" didn't keep PMGs in check, and if it did and is why the PMG was used much less, then wouldn't you agree that it was too effective in cqc and the reason SMGs and shotguns were used "less"? (FAR isn't just armas and JT, however it was locked behind an event, same as those other SMG rifles) We went from "HVR NTEC PMG CARBINE" to "HVR PMG NTEC CARBINE" hmm..... i don't actually see a "meta" change, however other weapons are being used more. I see no change in people charging with vehicles though, aside from what carspawns have created with it. It's always the same people car pushing anyways. Merged. APB's weapon system is made so that you can hit the TTK in cqc fairly easily, however they inflate the TTK at ranges intentionally. Rather than having lasers where every AR has 1-1.2TTK, they have it so that they can TTK at .7 in cqc, and when you fire at range, the bloom recovery and recoil makes it closer to 1.0-1.2s. This is intentional so that you can have faster cqc fights, but ranged fights last longer. This is to balance distanced firing as well so that rifles with TTKs of .8-1.2, and snipers have a TTK of .9 (ISSRB CQC sniper capabilities), with an average of ~1.4 (oblivion/ISSR) to 1.75 (HVR) can compete fairly well against each other 50m, without getting lasered at .7s by AR's. There are RNG moments because "omg recoil" and "oh no, i bloomed too much". While you can't really do anything except try to control recoil, the bloom is ones own fault. Can it be frustrating at times? Absolutely, however, that also falls on you to properly handle your weapon and adjust your aim as you fire. I think you have the idea of "niche" wrong as well. A weapon with a 50m range for example, doesn't mean that its "niche" is the "full" 50m. Look at the OCA, its 30m range, but a 0-15/20m "niche" where it's most effective. A weapon's "niche" is not fully defined by the total range the weapon has, it's defined by the accuracy, handling, ttk, and bloom/bloom recovery of the weapon. The star has a more 0-35m niche with decent tap/burst past that to 50m. The NTEC has a ~5/10-60m niche. The HVR has about 20m-100m niche where it's capable but it's best closer to 60-85 more outside the midrange where NTEC/STAR can be issues for it if it doesn't have cover. JG has a niche of 5m but full damage up to 10m ATAC has a niche of 0-25/30m or so, 40m full damage The niche is defined by the "effective range" not the "total range". The "effective" range would be where it's most effective at with all factors considered. As such weapons in APB have both an "effective range" and "overall range". Niches are then defined within the effective range via weapon handling, and "overall range" simply means where full damage "drops off". A lot of people don't understand weapon functionality within these "niches" and try to go the whole way with it, or claim weapons that are effective from the entire 0-Xm range are "balanced" (they aren't). This is why APB weapon balance is complex and difficult as well. Buffing a single weapon in one niche, can impede it into other weapon niches where it should not be effective. As such any weapon "buffs" HAVE to be handled much more carefully than weapon nerfs. However, nerfs must be handled in a way that it makes the weapon less effective in the intended ranges where they don't want it to be as effective, while maintaining its effectiveness in the range niche they want it to be in. You can somewhat see this in the NTEC nerf, where they nerfed its full auto and CQC, but left it's midrange capabilities intact, and when G1 buffed the STAR's bloom recovery, maintaining it's cqc-lowermid range effectiveness, while making it able to fire into the further "40-57m" distance easier as well, or the Cobra buff where they reduced the TTK and adjusted bloom/recovery so that the weapon can full auto in cqc, but is pretty good at bursting up to 30-40m, but has difficulties at 50m. There tends to be more thought into weapon balance than just "nerf this and make it useless", or "buff this completely". The changes tend to be geared towards where they want it to be effective, and with about what TTK within those ranges do they feel is balanced. Hence why you fire an ntec at 50m and it takes 1.0-1.3s to kill, while using the obeya at 50m, also takes up to 1.0-1.3s to kill. Despite the NTEC having .7ttk and obeya having .8 ttk. But cqc obeya can fairly easily hit a .9 or so, while ntec can be at .7. NTEC is meant to be more cqc to mid, while obeya can be more effective than ntec past 50m up to 100m, it comes with a much higher ttk at those further ranges, so that snipers have a chance. Hopefully this makes sense.

I did the math for that up to 10 shots for for PMG in comparison to each weapon so people can understand what that "change" does. For each bullet of the PMG, i calculated the bullets that would be fired by the OCA "if" fired at the exact time. Shots fired by the pmg at what interval vs shots fired vs the oca by the PMG's interval Time PMG .7 OCA .7 OCA .67 0.145 0.0875 0.08375 .67 4 7 8 .7 5 8 9 .87 6 9 10 1.015 7 11 12 1.16 8 13 13 1.305 9 14 15 1.45 10 16 17 You may feel there's an error with the timing at 1.16, however 0.08375 x 14 = 1.1725, which means that it wouldn't be firing until 14 shots until 1.17, not 1.16. So the normal OCA has the same "13 shots fired" at the same time buffed oca when the PMG fires 8 shots. --------------- ----------------- ------------------ ------------------- I personally "don't" feel that this change would mean much when it means to balance in comparison to the pmg, the OCA and cqc weapons already have an advantage against every other weapon ingame that aren't in the same niche class/niche. "1" more bullet downrange faster than normal in most cases is not anything to "gawk" at though. I don't feel that "re-buffing" the OCA is necessary when the PMG got overbuffed initially, this change would closen the gap slightly, however it would also re-widen the gap between it and AR's like the STAR, cobra and FAR which are meant to be more capable in CQC as well, and widen the gap between it and other cqc weapons. We can agree to disagree on that, which is fine, i never felt the OCA buff was necessary, so i'd be hard pressed to find a reason to re-buff it when I feel the PMG had needed a buff, but got overbuffed in the process.

Nah, its just people stopped spamming low yields so much. A lot of players are ineffective with grenades hence why low yields or percs, so when you face the small handful of players who actually "are" good with the frag, or the conc, and know how use cover for quick resupplies mid combat for more, it can feel "really" bad. Low yields were too powerful via their damage output/radius, speed, and number, they nerfed the damage and they're fine now. Concs have a tiny radius and large damage output, percs have a decent radius and decent damage. No-one really complained about the frag, only ever the conc and low yields and percs. I guess it shouldn't be surprising that it was only a matter of time for someone to mention "frags"

That is also a suggestion I can agree with, and would feel shotguns wouldn't need a ttk increase if so. However reliability of shotguns is also an issue. We don't want LO rework Shredder and NFAS here, but we certainly don't want 2013 CSG either. Corner popping does make them feel horrible to face at times. As such any change should be done carefully. If they STK is increased, depending on CSG or Jg I'd say a fairly reliable 4 hit at 5/8m would be fine with shotguns, while still being able to 3 hit pretty easily at and up to that range as well. Since it's clear that the JG and CS are somewhat around sub 10m fighters, then balance should be set for them to be fairly consistent "up to" x range. Shredder could use with a spread reduction, it feels nerfed in comparison to how it was, and it's extremely unreliable in range at this point. Strife feels "fine", it sadly doesn't feel near as reliable as it was, but i'm afraid touching it would only make it worse... In the end, you don't want it too consistent at 3 hits and feel like the shredder did, but you don't want it to be borked with how the feel currently almost like a dice roll. Grenades work wonders against corners, however i can agree, we should be careful about what kinds of grenades are added, personally I don't think grenades really need changed at this point. Though I can see reducing conc HP damage, and increasing their hard damage a little bit, it's not something I really think necessary. I do think a new bouncy perc would be hilarious. It bounces once then blows up on contact

I mean, Praetorians are essentially the strongarm of big businesses, Prentiss Tigers are the college jocks and Rich kids of High School. The enforcers use the law to enforce order, and the businesses use their money to get what they want. Teng does have plans for San Paro to some degree though, mostly for profits. Then there's Durrant, whos just a drunk who's doing it cause he hates thugs and something about his kid? I do enjoy the enf lore though, they each have their own reasons for it. I've never really cared or understood about the crim side of things. Getting the messages that read like gibberish really made me salty that such people were pulling at the strings in the background. G-Kings and Blood roses are kinda like the relatives and rich/poor people and school dropouts in the background pulling at the strings to get what they want via blackmail and force while remaining anonymous.

OCA never needed buffed to begin with so i don't know what you're going on about. All they did was litterally revert it to prebuff ttk. That's not the issue here. PMG got overbuffed in 2013 and it's been an issue since. Nerfing the NTEC was necessary regardless, the PMG however has been an issue long before the issues with the NTEC became known (you can thank HB for hiding them). The goalpost never moved, it's just that everyone was more preoccupied with the NTEC and the overpowered shotguns, rather than the PMG like they normally would have been after the shotgun rework. Just because one "topic" gains more prevalence and "hides" an issue, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, nor didn't before hand. Merged. Or just increase PMG's ttk slightly so that it's ease of use, range, and damage are better balanced overall.

PMG got buffed 2x then reworked so CJ3 effects it, OCA got "buffed" then CJ3 reworked, then reverted to its original power level. PMG got its accuracy buff (and i think something else), and range buffed. OCA got its TTK reduced (I think possibly an accuracy buff?) -> then ttk reverted. PMG was never an issue until they overbuffed it in 2013. It did need buffed, that's entirely true, however, not to the level that they buffed it to. Nerf the PMG "slightly" and it'll be better overall. There's litterally 0 reason to have accurate SMGs have lower than .7ttks without cj imo. As such reducing the PMG's power level would be the better option for balancing it, rather than buffing the OCA, which never needed rebalanced (aside from CJ3 effecting it) to begin with.

I mean, i agree with shotgun corner/cover peaking being an issue and that shotguns could use a higher ttk to compensate, however i'm still strongly against oca having a faster ttk. I can understand the desire to make shotguns have closer to a .8 ttk in general (and i feel it is a warranted suggestion.) However I also don't want shotguns to be completely decimated either. In general i think aside from the NFAS, SHAW or a small handfull of "spray with very little accuracy" weapons like NFA, no weapon should have a ttk faster than .7 as a "base" ttk. So i cannot agree with OCA getting a ttk buff. I can however agree with making shotguns have a higher base ttk than SMGs due to cover advantage. I feel .7s is a good "base" ttk for weapons that function sub 30m. (and i'm eternally upset that G1 intentially screwed up the increased TTK testing weapon stats to make it so that noone would support increasing the game's ttk) Yes, those situations happen a lot, however i don't factor that "perfect invisible shot" into balancing the shotgun either. that's fine to do, it can and does happen. Albeit it's not common for it to happen at all.

If it's missed or avoided you wouldn't be taking that much damage from it. I've mained frags for years over all other grenades. I've seen it literally tickle players, other times it doesn't. I've never felt it was too powerful over other grenades.

OCA was the most balanced SMG in the games existence. They decided to "buff it" initially via faster ttk, they then made CJ effect it, and THEN they decided to undo the faster ttk. Overall the OCA is one weapon that should have never been touched aside from CJ 3 having an effect on it. PMG has been an issue since it got buffed initially. Hell, back then OCA was used almost as much as the broken CSG was, so that's arguably not true about OCA being terrible. OCA isn't meant to be used much past 15m. The problem is that PMG has better accuracy at range (ontop of hitting like a truck), and the exact same ttk. G1 buffed the PMG several times, and ended up making it too strong, and instead of tweaking it better to balance it, they left it as is. Shotguns rule the sub 5-8m fights, OCA comes in up to ~15-20m, PMG goes up to ~30. However PMG doesn't suffer from a slower rof for its better accuracy and range.

OCA was never really nerfed. It was reverted to it's base stats, aside from having CJ3 effect it. OCA never needed its initial buff ttk buff, in fact it never should have gotten one to begin with. It was only buffed because they decided to buff and bork shotguns with reduced ttks. The problem with balancing shotguns is they either are consistent and become cqc kings with corners and without corners, or you make them reliant on corners and cover without very much usability outside of corners. LO had suggested making them spend more time outside of corners to help counteract the issue, but never went that route.

Don't get me wrong, it can happen, it's just really rare to hit all shots perfectly at that distance.

it happens haha

you're right, i think its always taken at least 12 shots past 20m

The CSG was too powerful with its predetermined spread originally. When they went first and reworked shotgun spread, they reworked the CSG to no longer have predetermined spread, they then gave every shotgun the same mechanic for spread,, likely due to coding limitations and to nerf the powerlevel of the CSG in one go while somewhat re-balancing the other shotguns, as well as lag prevention with the server. They did have a thread on it when they reworked shotgun spread and how it was calculated, before and after, and why. But that disappeared with the old forums. In the end the answer would be "to balance it better".

it's because they simply dotted the dots there to indicate randomness. It's not intentional, it's simply that there's "more" edgespace than "centerspace" for the pellots to hit the chance to land at.

I don't see it much of an issue, though i do feel that preventing enemies from "camping" the car would be the simplest fix. Also 50m concs are pretty hard to hit on a moving vehicle. I do end up leaving most vehicle missions before they start though. (Mojang money is absolutely the worst on defense)

I mean, i've done similar for each of those weapons and grendades, however I highly disagree that frags are too powerful. So please don't act all high and mighty, I've gone through the same bs with others. It doesn't however mean you are "always" right on everything you think to be wrong. The logical argument is that they are balanced with their timer and damage. 7m is not too big of a blast radius, and min blast damage can be rather low. They have a fairly slow throw speed, with the timer of 4 seconds. You sprint at 6 m/s. Most times depending on distance you have at "least" 1 second to react which means depending on distance you have roughly 2s to react. meaning depending on where/how far you are from where they are throwing (such as whether it's an ambush grenade or not) you generally have plenty of time to react AND move from the blast radius. That is, as long as you know it's coming for you. Player awareness is a massive thing that is necessary when playing against grenades. If you have no such awareness of grenades or cannot quickly identify it's fly angle and distance, you're going to suffer consistently because of it. That doesn't mean that the grenade is overpowered. I can agree here, i can dislike conc hp damage or the existence of percs at times, but that doesn't make them broken.

Vegas 4x4 has a slower max speed than the g20 honestly. Most vehicles have a max speed of 18-20. Except the vegas series which is 23/22 for both the g20 and 4x4. Hell, the growl has a max speed of 22.7 (i just looked that up, and am surprised) but noone talks about that one as being too good because it's almost a glass cannon.

Hmm I didn't realize it was that high now. Maybe it's just the fr0g or my aim being dumb then, most likely it's enemies getting behind cover just long enough for it to negate the damage and add an extra shot.

What logic? NTEC is fine didn't need touched, didn't include any logic, only opinion, and one that even G1 and LO disagreed with, which ended up with its nerf twice. Did I say that new players "should"? No I only said that new players often identify what they consider gameplay problems and call for there removal more than veterans do. This isn't wrong, you see far more average players bring up suggestions for balance, whether it be locational, mission stage/location, weapon, or gameplay. You rarely see vets do any of that. This is regardless of whether or not they "should" have a say in the matter. Many have made suggestions for legitimate changes, such as buffing the star, odin series, fixing broken locations by adding more entry into them. I'm not going to be ignorant and ignore "every" suggestion from a new player or even "average" player without seeing if it first has "any" merit. I'm not ignorant. You think that weapon balance isn't thought out to some degree before implemented? Every weapon change has been thought out, tested, and pushed out. That is regardless of whether it worked or not, or whether anyone "believes" it should have been done or not. Merged. I agree, i do tend to be bad at conveying things at times. The game company doesn't make changes simply because a new player asked for it. It generally has to have some form of backing. Most (not all) changes have had some mixture of average and veteran support and some form of suggestion for it to be done (LO and G1 do read forums and said that if they were "looking at something" already they said they may take it into consideration). The difference is also that just because the company decided to nerf something doesn't mean they are going to go about the same way as suggested. There have been multiple reworks that weren't suggested by at least any players that I know of or seen on forums, while still having that weapon or feature changed. Clusterfuck means clusterfuck from mission balance, spawning, the glitch/exploit abuse, to weapons ranging from pretty good to extremely underwhelming. It's not directed at the NTEC, it's directed at what the gamestate is generally called "overall". It's really chaotic. So the "Average players" are ruining the game by trying to make the game more enjoyable, rather than enjoyable for a select few veteran players? Game companies have to weigh changes they make and how it will affect the game overall. Any change, weapon, vehicle they add, is always weighed for both groups of players as well as for whatever goal they intend to meet. They also admit they cannot make everyone on both sides happy. They do try to balance things out, but will always end up upsetting someone if any changes are made and have consistently said this. Vets like to argue that a lot of changes are unnecessary, yet at the same time, doing so ends up increasing "player enjoyability" (of other players) to some degree. Maybe not "every vet" is happy about it but it may make a large number of other players happy. Let's not forget that vets range in skill level, play style, and drastically as well. I don't think you're doing it for kicks at all, don't get me wrong, I can understand where you're coming from to some degree. I used to play OW heavily and everything in it has been rebalanced a billion fricken times because of powercreep and new heroes and "unfun" abilities just legit destroying gameplay enjoyability. (And a number of unnecessary changes to boot) Even if you, or I may not like something happening, there does tend to be a reason, even if we don't like the answer. OW leads for example tends to do very well at conveying their "idea" for what they want and lay out exactly why the character or weapon or ability is being reworked/nerfed/buffed/changed whether for balance, enjoyability to go against, or ease of use. However, here in APB you get a little bit of text that says "we felt it was too effective". Ironically on both games you still end up having the same response, "your statistics are wrong it didn't need changed, you gave in to the casual noobs". I saw HB and QS as gameplay things that were too powerful, however well within the bounds of what the game permitted. HB and Qsing weren't glitches, they weren't exploits (though qsing essentially bypassed the hvrs 2 hit ttk via 3ps3 to make it easier for a kill), they didn't necessarily "bypass" preset intended features (like the slowdown on a vehicle from carrying a vip/item hold obj). Half the players did them, yet hated their existence. Most people do things regardless of if they like it or not, and whether its sportsmanship to do or not, because everyone else does it, or because they know they won't be banned for it. You don't have to like the fact that I did them while calling for their removal, as I said, I did what I felt I had to.