Most of the time tremulous stops at 2000 points, unless you sell a weapon. Then you may get a few extra. I think the number of points should be changed to a higher amount.

2000 credits and 9 evo points is balanced amount, so we will use it too.

We can always have a mod similar to those old 1.1 servers that uses things like !bank, !withdraw/deposite/w/d, !donate [In p-bot it's differrent though, it contributes to rising your team's weapon damage and buildable health]

First thing you must know: CU|Ams hates !share. (He must have been bad at it)
So, now everyone hates it.

First thing you must know: CU|Ams hates !share. (He must have been bad at it)
So, now everyone hates it.

The second thing you must know is that in "gameplay changing matters" CU|Ams' word counts and Gunthers' does not.

The third thing you must know: CU|Ams is a veteran player with incredible skills and great knowledge about gameflow and balance issues. Gunther skill is mediocre and his gameflow understanding is close to none.

The fourth thing you must know: many people wanted "/share" implemented on Rcz, only one of them was a skilled player (PPNL). Rest of skilled players didn't want "/share".

The fifth thing you should know: The reasons why share is bad for gameplay balance.

Stuff

And, from the topic from tremulous.net on credit-share:

What a load.

All this debate about whether share is slowly killing the strategy involved in Tremulous is Pure Nonsense.

There are no numbers whatsoever that share has somehow increased camping or complacency, it's merely an individual perception or else one player hears it from another and it solidifies into fact. Lets make a fairly large assumption in assuming share has made it easier to obtain a higher credit- or evo-costing weapon/upgrade/class. So what? After all, it's not what weapon or class you currently have, it's how you use that and for what purpose. Many of the top-tier players (note of clarification: those that I know, almost exclusively NA) have little concern whether share is enabled or not, as they are justifiably secure in the knowledge that they have the skills to use any or most of the available weapons/upgrades/classes at hand to the teams benefit.  If you want to peg individual player traits, such as camping, kill-whoring, feeding etc. on share you can. But when that same player is still camping, kill-whoring, and feeding without share, I hope the point has been made that such a minor game element like share will not make or break a player, how they choose to play the game will. 

In the end, we're left arguing over what should be a non-issue.  Different players have different preferences, and if they're faced with a server that is in conflict with those set preferences - leave. The fact that you're (the reader, not the OP of the thread or any respondents in particular) not being forced to play on a specific server, use a specific QVM, et cetera should in theory negate any right to complain about something like share, and yet invariably complaints arise. There are many things I don't like, whether they're related to Tremulous or not. I hardly feel compelled to stand in front of the Tremulous community and arrogantly act like I can tell the community what they should or should not condone. Like it or not, share has quickly become accepted as a common setting, and although not everyone is in full agreement with it, any decision to remove it from the QVM's or source trunks that currently have support for share would be seen as more antagonistic than meaningful.

For those that have been following along, you'll also notice that I stated an opinion, whereas grmg.pl did what most people seem to do, and go with what those that he looks up to have told him, and therefor defending their ideals. If we're still basing this on facts, then here's one: When everyone was making the transition from 1.1 to 1.2, many old friends of mine, after I told them about it, came to RCZ, and some of the first questions they asked were included "does this server have share turned on?" And when the answer was no, and they played for a while and said "now only the botters and the less-lagged can win", and promptly went back to 1.1

MY opinion was stated on Rcz forum. I feel no need to repeat it here.

Share is bad thing and making teams unbalanced. Not to mention that every amateur player will beg for evos/credits every 10 seconds.

But, it is popular feature. We still don't know if we implement it, but if yes, then it will not be enabled on official servers.

I'll have to agree with Rota's assessment of share and donate above.  I also want to point out that share messes up scrims by basically turning it into a "Share your best player all your credits/evos" game.

I think 2000 is a good limit. If it were much higher LC/rant whoring and such could become excessive among the top tier players.

Share is a naive solution to an interesting problem.
Share can create very assymetric scenarios, because the top tier players on a team can feed eachother,
as such stacking differences can be amplified.

When assuming the top players will share equally to all share isn't entirely assymetric;
The entire team can benefit from a expert player. If that player decides to camp with a rant or chainsuit and just keeps donating to his team this can lead to very skewed scenarios.
But: unskilled players that feed excessively will indirectly donate that XP to the enemy, so this does balance it somewhat. OTOH that would require a hetrogenous team of high skill and low skill, if the team has a lot of average players that don't feed blindly it would certainly amplify stax.

Another problem with share is it creates a lack of incentive for the low skill players, players not bothering upping their dretch skills and such, just sitting in base and whining for evos/creds . Again, it's somewhat counterbalanced by the fact that they might get more experience in using the bigger aliens in the long run.
But it doesn't solve the problem on a per-round basis.

A less naive implementation might work better?
For instance, you could view it as some kind of negative income tax

1. high skill players donate XP into a shared team pool, so no cherry picking by the top players
2. these would then be redistributed with following conditions:
2.1. low score/time ratio players should be favoured
2.2. to avoid excess stax; redistribution rate should be dependent on how the team is doing.

"How the team is doing" is an open question, stages and frags/deaths ratio seems a good starting point.
In such a system the low skill players can still feed the other team with the redistributed XP, but the balancing+spreading mechanism would make it less excessive.

You could even make it a tax system instead of a charity, but I imagine then you'll have to deal with a ton of camping and bitching about feeding.

Nalf has a system on his server that shows how many credits/evos your teammates have. Doesn't work with ma custom HUD, so I use the console.
Something that could be done: cap a share limit to 1 evo/180 creds per life. Also perhaps for only when you are alive, so as not to turn the last Dretch into a Tyrant. If made annoying, then it will only be used in times of desperation. 

Nalf has a system on his server that shows how many credits/evos your teammates have. Doesn't work with ma custom HUD, so I use the console.
Something that could be done: cap a share limit to 1 evo/180 creds per life. Also perhaps for only when you are alive, so as not to turn the last Dretch into a Tyrant. If made annoying, then it will only be used in times of desperation. 

Tremulous is a team game, there are many times in a scrimmage where if I'm bigger alien and I know a kill secured, I will just stand there and block to let the little aliens that need the evos pick up the kill.  Even a share limit would detract from this kind of team play. 

I do really like the idea of being able to see teammate's evos though.

On the KoRx mod, if you overkill, you automatically donate funds to your team evenly. If your team's full... well i'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but it shares to the opposite team for some reason. Well at least it doesn't mean the other team will be stuck naked/dretch for eternity, despite adv tyrants and biokit-ed suits being overpowered...

On the KoRx mod, if you overkill, you automatically donate funds to your team evenly. If your team's full... well i'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but it shares to the opposite team for some reason. Well at least it doesn't mean the other team will be stuck naked/dretch for eternity, despite adv tyrants and biokit-ed suits being overpowered...

I do find it annoying when I have Tyrant and 9evos and mash two luci-suits into the walls. I mean, really, why should I have to do all the killing because humans are stacked again?

if you overkill, you automatically donate funds to your team evenly.

This is just "share on by default" in different clothes.

but it shares to the opposite team for some reason. Well at least it doesn't mean the other team will be stuck naked/dretch for eternity

Bad idea. There are other ways around killwhoring uber-rants/suits. One of them is not to have idiot chaingun-luci-no-skill-required weapons.