R Unlimited CZ

If you have 9 evos and then make another kill (or have 2000 credits), you will not receive anything more. The new evos/credits just get destroyed.

So, you could then use the

/share substringofname 2

or

/donate 2

commands to give 2 evos to someone (or the ones who have the least).

But not only newbies are unaware of this! And also, sometimes you just forget or don't care about this. And so, your team loses valuable resources.

The other team, however, is well informed and uses binds to donate something from time to time.

It's superiority by obscurity.

There is a feature called "autodonate" that some servers have enabled. This would automatically give the evos/credits that you can not receive because you're full to those who have the least. This is even better than doing it manually, because when you do it manually, you're always below 9/2000.

As I have pointed out, I find it discriminating against less experienced/informed players.

I think autodonate should always be activated.

What are your thoughts on this?

i will to do bind for give 1 in alien/100 in human in /donate

i don't no if you understand me then i try to say it in german

ich werde bind um evo/credit nach meine "team" zu geben machen

say me god, if it's corect?

I understood both.

What is your opinion? Should "autodonate" be enabled?

I think that not only the autodonate should be disabled, but /donate and /shared should be disabled too.
Also I know that everyone likes donate and share so I will get thrown with rotten eggs in few moments.

Quarko, I have no problem with the opinion, only with not understanding why you see it like that.

Ok, I will try to explain it then.
A common scenario. Alien team has better players than human team, so they got several rants, and several dretches. Humans are mostly naked, fighting for survival. With donate you can ONLY camp: if rant kills you - alien team will get more rants. If dretch kills you - alien team will get more rants. So, rants will obviously cornercamp to provide evos to their teammates. This produces mass of corner-rant-camp and human-base-camp.
However, if there was NO share and NO donate - rants would have absolutely no reason to camp behind corners (they will just increase their kill counter, doh!). And humans would have NO reason for being scared of rants. Even if you feed a rant, that will not bring any further disbalance to the game. However if you are able to kill it with your rushing teammates - you will get tonns of credits, and enemy team will gain NOTHING, the rant will remain a rant, not 6 rants. Also you can just try rushing the rant to kill some nearby dretches, and ignoring the rant. If he kills you - that will change nothing.

That's a good reason, even though I have a problem with the premise "Alien team has better players than human team". If better team results in win, then what's wrong with that? Does the argument really need this premise?

Doesn't the share situation go both ways? A good human player can supply the others with cash. Cash he got from killing dretches that came into human base while humans were camping.

EDIT: Maybe I am looking at the thing from the wrong side, but it is my feeling that either a trem server is balanced by itself (meaning: it shouldn't be principally easier for one side to make kills than for the other side) or the share/donate, be it enabled or disabled, wouldn't solve the imbalance.

I agree with Quarko, but share is too much popular to disable it.

With share on you have smaller chance to see dretch for kill. All supporting tyrants. If known player join aliens, he not starting like dretch and give humans no credits. Why? Because someone share him 5 evos and human meet only fresh tyrant.

I was on server with autodonate on and there was many free evos due to autodonate. You can wait a while and you have tyrant. That caused only one thing - whole game was tyrants VS battlesuits with luci or chain, nothing else.

But if you using share and donate very much, is is similar to autodonate- but atleast you lose few evo/creds, with autodonate you have still full.

Rotacak, I see your point and agree that with Autodonate on it could be different in the way you said.

But I have a strong problem in principle with a game gaining its difficulty level through interface problems.