\take does not address this issue. You can have a 9 evo'd dragoon running around and he will be a prime target for getting his credits \taken away.
Your example defeats your argument. You have a rich dragoon running around who could only potentially benefit from another 3 evolution points. Is it good that there is a dragoon with 9 evolution points? The very fact that it is a dragoon running around with 9 evolution points implies it is not planning on evolving immediately (and even if it were it would not need those points).
It is probably going around kill whoring and those extra evolution points its teammates could use are going to complete waste. But they could just use take...
You are portraying this as though it targets a single player. It does not. It distributes the burden fairly evenly for everyone who can afford it (for certain definitions of "afford").
Also \take harms team harmony in a way \share doesn't. \share is a gift, a donation -- you are doing what you want with your money, when you want. \take, on the other hand, is outright Robin Hood style theft.
Rich people tend to give expensive gifts they don't need. This is not allowed in Tremulous even with share. But you are right about this being the Robin Hood patch since it takes from the rich and gives to the needy.
What will basically happen is no one will be able to have more money than the take threshold, ever, as everyone will have \take 9999 bound and be tapping it every few seconds. I can hear the cries of "WTF happen to my evos!!!" already...
You are assuming that someone will take some money, buy equipment, feed, rinse and repeat, and their teammates will never catch on. You are assuming that this accounts for 90% or more of the Tremulous players. Even if this were to happen, which I doubt, you could always make a bind like "take 70; buy larmour" and never worry about carrying spare cash.
Also, remember that that threshold is configurable with g_takeRatio. The point would usually be to have that at a point low enough that no one can drain too much, but high enough so that money taken is usable.
Furthermore, \take doesn't enable the same kind of gameplay. A team of 5, where everyone has one evo, cannot assemble a Tyrant with \take, but can with \share.
Tremulous is a team game, not a typical Rambo kill-em-all shooter. If that team were capable of working as such, they would not need to pool their money to get a big bad beastie.
If you are concerned with people running about with full credits, a better feature would be spill-over. After 2000 credits, or 9 evos, further money will go to your teammates or into BPS etc.
That relies on people getting the full amount of credits allowed, which should not happen typically (unless someone is going out kill whoring and is not really supporting their team in any way). Take let's them help their team, willing or no.
At a point, you have to question sharing / donating / pooling points.
Players have credits, not teams. Why is this? I don't think Tremulous was designed with socialism in mind.
Edit:
I don't mean to give the impression that I'm so arrogant I actually believe everything I do is perfect. The fact is that, of all the perfectly valid complaints one could have with take (all of which are just how I implemented it, part of why I want it tested out), the things brought up are least problematic. If these things actually effect take, then I screwed something up, but most of them effect it less than the supposedly better alternatives.
This is a different approach to solve problems with things designed to solve non-problems. I don't know how well it will accomplish that because everyone is so stuck up on share that they won't even try it.
