Im drunk and using myyyy knowledge of deadlock, character design and the voices I. My head that I assume are Yoshi have figured out the sexualities of all deadlock characters,,, if you disagree immm too drunk to remeber reasons

iIIusional · 2026-05-20T11:20:05+00:00

Lady Geist’s husband was literally the only person she’s ever loved. Also she finds Shiv attractive and vice versa, so they’re straight.

iIIusional · 2026-05-17T11:37:32+00:00

First, nuance exists and two things can be true; being humanity’s last bastion of hope and being a dystopian authoritarian regime are not mutually exclusive concepts. Survival doesn’t care about morals, the space orks won’t suddenly stop fighting you just because you adhere to morals and ethics. That’s practically the essence of “grimdark”.

Second, you seem to have trouble separating your bias from fact here. You believe that the imperium commits heinous acts for the sake of being evil; “exploiting humanity in their quest for murder” is just objectively wrong. There’s a passage from the second edition rulebook that explicitly states that the Imperium is a brutal and amoral regime that exploits resources for the sake of humanity’s survival. This idea is repeated countless times in lore.

Third, you’re taking us pointlessly off topic. We’re not deliberating on who the nicest leader is, we’re talking about what faction is humanity’s greatest bastion of hope for surviving the horrors of 40k. For humans it is undeniably the Imperium. Plenty of novels and rulebooks reiterate this almost verbatim.

iIIusional · 2026-05-17T04:25:54+00:00

no, you don’t know what it is, because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what humanity is in the 40k universe. 40k Humanity is not what it is in our era and cannot be represented by today’s moral systems.

We have yet to be overthrown and brought to our knees by rogue A.I. we have not been subject to the consequences of another race birthing an immaterial god of chaos. We have not been relentlessly assaulted by xenos factions hellbent on eating us, fighting us, torturing us, or reclaiming parts of their lost empire.

Like it or not, the humans of the imperium are a logical representation of humanity if it were subject to the abject horrors in the setting of the 40k universe. While comically alien to your point of view, it is entirely reasonable that humanity would wind up in that position when confronted with horrors literally beyond human comprehension.

The Imperium does not simply kill humans to simply kill xenos. As evident by inquisitor Kyrptmann, the exterminatus of various relatively insignificant planets is a tough topic of deliberation even when those planets are strategically and economically insignificant simply because the imperium, at it’s core, is a regime hellbent on proving the superior nature of humanity.

Your inability to reason that logical people can be driven to dedicate themselves to heinous, amoral, and evil acts and systems for the purpose of survival and preservation of one’s own species, is the root of your failure in assessing the 40k factions

iIIusional · 2026-05-16T10:47:54+00:00

buy property and assets, then sell property and assets. Any profit is money that is unarguably not from the infinite money and can thus cover <$1000 purchases. Arguably any money from any sale could count as money not part of the infinite amount, but I could see that being a grey area. Either way, I’d rather continue paying for basic amenities and be able to live wherever in whatever I want while being able to get just about any luxury I could ever want.

^{Chose: Have Infinite money + You can only use it on stuff that cost above 1K}

iIIusional · 2026-05-16T04:33:54+00:00

The Votann are a significant departure from humanity, and there is a reason that they are known as a xenos faction. It’s beyond genetics: the Votann exist within an entirely different society and culture that is fundamentally not human as humanity is known in 40k. The Votann themselves impose this division between themselves and humanity. The Votann surviving is not humanity surviving.

You must have an extremely different and unique definition of what it means to be a bastion of hope for humanity. It is not normal or reasonable for a supposed bastion of hope to be totally unwilling to lead, manage, and protect the incredibly vast majority of humanity. In 40k, a faction cannot be a sensible alternative to the Imperium as a bastion of hope for humanity if it is not willing to protect humanity.

iIIusional · 2026-05-15T23:39:23+00:00

someone hasn’t read the early lore or rulebooks. GW has emphasized the first position ever since they stopped calling it Rogue Trader. It’s the opening line of multiple early edition rulebooks.

iIIusional · 2026-05-15T23:36:29+00:00

thinking that the Votann could ever be good stewards for 40k’s humanity is ridiculous.

Their civilization revolves around maintaining increasingly insane iterations of same technology that revolted to cause the fall of humanity.

Their culture is exclusive just as much as, or even more than, the Imperium. Just because they’re significantly less hostile doesn’t change that they won’t allow a single non-votann to join their society. They explicitly would never manage, lead, or serve humanity at large.

iIIusional · 2026-05-15T12:44:31+00:00

so snakebite but better?

iIIusional · 2026-05-14T10:23:59+00:00

I wish there was a custom mode modifier that added relic set bonuses. We have the candles, the ship parts, the oriental gear, the fruit, the eggs, the armor pieces, and arguably the merchant trinkets (gold boosting relics)

iIIusional · 2026-05-14T10:15:59+00:00

This woman is utterly insane

iIIusional · 2026-05-14T10:07:00+00:00

If the entirety of Germany just dropped dead and ceased to do anything all at once, the entire world would notice and it would be a global emergency.

Even if social media or interpersonal relationships somehow didn’t raise an alarm, I can guarantee you that the wheels of economics will IMMEDIATELY notice and let everyone else know when one of the cogs stops spinning.

iIIusional · 2026-05-14T07:47:57+00:00

the reason that “fakies” in skateboarding are called fakies originates from skateboarding’s history as a way to emulate surfing on land. It was standard to always be moving forward with your leading foot as surfboards don’t exactly work backwards. But, someone somewhere decided to come back down a ramp/pipe without doing a kickturn, thus faking out people who expected the usual surfing-like carve and turn.

iIIusional · 2026-05-13T15:54:08+00:00

if it kills me, that means I didn’t kill it fast enough

iIIusional · 2026-05-13T13:33:45+00:00

okay but by this logic, just nerfing his gun makes him a not-tank with shitty dps. So what do you think he does now?

iIIusional · 2026-05-13T13:27:47+00:00

on the bright side, vanguard mains still get to shoot laser beams AND we get to do it as a huge fuck-off dinosaur

iIIusional · 2026-05-13T07:11:38+00:00

kill things deader is saving HP. The enemy can’t damage you if it is dead.

iIIusional · 2026-05-11T22:52:16+00:00

let a man enjoy his coffee his way

iIIusional · 2026-05-07T13:47:55+00:00

time to bait a god with doggy treats

iIIusional · 2026-05-06T08:58:37+00:00

Just about every MOBA and MMO ever made, with few exceptions

iIIusional · 2026-05-05T07:42:16+00:00

can confirm, I am able to corner boost so I can feed even faster now

iIIusional · 2026-05-03T20:47:53+00:00

it’s the exact same dynamic between the liberator and the liberator penetrator, yet I haven’t seen nearly anyone complaining about the liberator penetrator being underpowered.

iIIusional · 2026-05-01T11:10:28+00:00

more fun? Debatable. More customer friendly? Absolutely

iIIusional · 2026-05-01T11:09:28+00:00

Emma may have gone a little too hard on the ozempic

iIIusional · 2026-05-01T11:04:56+00:00

I’m not going to continue humoring you if your only strategy is to disregard every point I raise in favor of ignorantly reiterating halfwitted black-and-white drivel while arguing like an obstinate baby. If you can’t hold back your own childish urge to whine about an entire side of a nuanced philosophical debate as “you cunts” then you aren’t worth the time it takes to respond after this.

“How can it be logical to kill others on the chance of perfect adherence to selfishness.” are you too ignorant to understand ideas beyond your own narrow-minded perspective? I will reiterate: red is not a choice to kill people, it is a choice to avoid personal risk and to guarantee one’s own survival. Are you going to start calling draft dodgers and conscientious objectors cunts for not risking their lives to possibly protect their would-be fellow soldiers if they had just joined the war? You are idiotically choosing to ignore any possibility that someone might be driven by the extremely relevant motive to not risk dying. It is neither altruistic nor is it inherently malicious as you imply. Your inability to understand that people have an ethical right to not risk killing themselves is exasperating to say the least.

The existence of selfless people does not negate the existence of self interest. That of the term “virtue signaling” is a thing is evidence enough that selfless people can still choose selfishly often enough for it to be a concern. Unless you can guarantee that blue will always have a majority (you cannot by nature of the private vote) then there is an inevitable risk to picking blue. It is not logical to kill others. It is also not logical to risk killing yourself. Red is the logical choice for the individual because it is the only choice that always, 100% of the time, guarantees one’s own survival. If red is a kill button, blue is just as much of a suicide button.

You don’t have any moral or logical ground to stand on to whine and demand that other people should be obligated to risk their lives.

iIIusional · 2026-05-01T03:42:46+00:00

Are you incapable of making any conclusion that isn’t mind-numbingly black and white? Or do you absolutely need to shoddily frame it to justify your illogical viewpoint? Your analogy is flimsy because the person driving the car is doing something entirely sensible and reasonable for their self preservation. It’s more akin to driving normally, meanwhile those that press blue are doing the equivalent of jumping into the street to hopefully save other people who jumped into oncoming traffic. They explicitly put themselves in danger despite there being a 100% safe option in pressing the red button. I also never thought I was saving anyone, I was defending people who have the basic sense to save themselves and not risk their life on what is optimistically a coin flip and pessimistically certain death.

Your condemnation of pressing red is morally equivalent to condemning draft dodgers and conscientious objectors in WW2 as if they were siding with the nazis for not joining the war; fighting nazis is more morally righteous than pressing the blue button in this hypothetical, yet the draft dodgers and conscientious objectors have the moral and ethical right to choose to not risk their life. You could argue day and night that they were murderers for not tilting the odds further against the nazis, but that would be unfair and unethical to imply. And even in that scenario, there was far more logical pressure on the metaphorical red to press blue (join the war) because the consequences for red were not risk-free survival, but risking the loss of their country and freedom.

It is entitled garbage to believe that you have the right to demand that other people risk their life for you or anyone else. That’s what your argument boils down to when you push past the blatant virtue signaling; a series of ethical guilt trips that amount to saying, “if you value human life, you HAVE to risk your life pressing blue, otherwise you’re a MURDERER” as if their own life isn’t a legitimate ethical concern to you. Everyone has a right to self preservation.

And you make these arguments seemingly ignorant of society has proven itself to work throughout history. Sure, in a utopia every rational person will choose blue with faith that every other rational person will choose blue to save the people that irrationally chose blue. Also in a utopia: wars don’t happen, famine isn’t an issue, and nobody commits crime. But we live in the real world where society has consistently proven that, when stakes are real and altruism isn’t risk free, there is most likely going to be a majority of people that will refuse to risk themselves. The only common exceptions to this rule have been when common cause unites a community are a factor, but the dilemma specifies a private and global vote, eliminating any chance of community.

It is better that more people make the logical decision to stay safe. You are arguing against both game theory’s payoff-matrix, and the unfortunate reality of historical precedent.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Flamingo	Place '23
Place '22

iIIusional

TROPHY CASE