Locust unit InRange

I though of a way to get units in range that has locust and belongs to a group.
This is for collision detection on locust units.
But i dont know how slow this is.

-If i pick all units in a group
-remove locust
-hide/unhide
-GetUnitInRange
-do collision detections
-add locust

will this be possible in theory?

create rect and detect units in rect

Locust units don't have collision as far as I know... but that's probably innate knowledge at this stage...

The problem with rects is that they're always square or rectangle, which means you can't use it to detect 'Units in Range' because some will be left out.

im not asking for an alternate solution, im asking for if my theory works (in theory).
Creating rect or whatsoever is really slow for collision detection system.

locust units arent picked in "Units in rect".

in theory your "solution" should work yes, but I dont think it will be nearly fast enough, but its worth a try.

Sry for off topic but...What does people mean by "not fast"?

not fast == slow
fast != slow
fast is good
slow is bad

Usually you don't notice the speed of functions and natives. When you make a system that does a lot of calculations every time-step (about 0.035 for visual systems), the speed of functions becomes noticeable. Increasing speed is then a most, as systems that are "not fast" and not optimized will lag.

my system do calculation every 0.03 ;)

it might be slower than to detect UnitEnterRegion event =) cause the war3 "engine" must do some special calcs to make unit unselectable etc... + i think
!!! a + you must call for group ! the for group intialization is fucking slow ! (i think they use some rocket alg to call custom functions cause for group 1 unit is slower than to do this manualy but if you have a bunch of unit's (100) for group is faster than to loop throuht !!!) so i don't know... i would say this solution sucks ! + i am got a 100% better solution ! =)

USE VEX TRICK TO MAKE UNITS UNSELECTABLE BUT I MAKES UNITS TARGETABLE + GroupEnumUnitsInRange works very well ! + (don't forget to add Invurnablility)
but it's you disicion...

yes i doesnt work ! (my washing machine does not work some one have fucked my washing machine =) ... my washing machine does not work ! WHY DID YOU fuck my washing machine !? FUCK ! ... awesome track =) ) + the rect must exist before unit "is in" and etc. but enter/leave events works well !

why would i do for group -.-

because for group is freakin awsome, thats why.

is for group still slower if you you firstofgroup loop and want to keep the units? like, have 2 groups, delete units from 1, add them to the other and use the other group the next run trough?


which would be?

UnitAddAbility(u,'some chaos transform spell')
UnitAddAbility(u,'Aloc')

and if you got alot unit's in group ForGroup is faster than a loop !

noone is talking about alot of units here.

100 are alot =)