Obviously, there are many games where a team wants all of its member to live. However, it is often advantageous for a team to have its low-rated player die if there is a much higher-rated teammate. This situation is more likely to be the case when there is a greater rating disparity between teammates, in full share games, and with larger maps. In theory, for good and fun game design, it shouldn't be advantageous for a team to sacrifice its low-rated player for that reason, or otherwise be disadvantaged by comparison if the low-rated member lives.
I am talking about in games with large rating disparities between teammates here; the kind you might get in all welcome games, or the Duelist's recent 2v2 tournament, or the recent Seton's 2v2 tournament, or the recent Seton's 4v4 tournament, etc. In addition to it creating an undesirable dynamic for the team itself, it also often creates an undesirable dynamic for the enemy team, where they have the bizarre situation of being better off actively trying to not kill the lower-rated enemy player if the player has a much higher-rated teammate.
What could improve this situation?
Share until death is one potential solution, but it is too punishing in some cases, yet it is still sometimes advantageous for a team to lose its lower-rated teammate in others. Perhaps units shouldn't give as much reclaim when they die due to player death in share until death games? Perhaps you have a better idea?
For full share, perhaps there could be a delay for transferred unit usage/resource generation for a teammate. For example, perhaps there could be a 30-second period where all of the transferred units are stunned and the transferred mass extractors are toggled off during that period. (The 30 seconds is an arbitrary suggestion; the point is that there would be some sort of delay, not necessarily 30 seconds specifically.)
Perhaps there should be an additional share condition option called partial share. Partial share would share some portion of a player's units the way full share does, but it would also kill some portion the way share until death does. This sounds nice in theory, but what portion of the player's units would it transfer vs kill, and how would it determine which are killed vs transferred? Perhaps it should kill units occupying 1/3 of the dying player's used unit cap, chosen at random, when the player dies? Perhaps you have a better idea?
What do you think?