Staredit Network > Forums > SC1 UMS Mapmaking Assistance > Topic: Question of tracking what units are closest in proximity to a si
Question of tracking what units are closest in proximity to a si
Sep 26 2017, 8:56 am
By: m.0.n.3.y  

Sep 26 2017, 8:56 am m.0.n.3.y Post #1



Question of tracking what units are closest in proximity to a single central unit

So here's the situation.

I have a human p1 controlling a single zergling. Players 4, 5, and 6 also have a single zergling each. I would like to track which player (4, 5, or 6) is closest in proximity to the p1's zergling.

The way I've thought of to do this is to stack multiple locations on top of p1's zergling, each being normal grid square than the last. For example, Location 1 would be the size of the zergling, location 2 would be 1 normal grid square bigger than location 1 on all sides, location 3 would be 1 normal gride square bigger than location 2 on all sides, and so on and so on. If X = zergling the visual would be this: X,location 1, location 2, location 3, location 4.

The triggers would be something like this:
Trigger
Players

  • Player 1
  • Conditions

  • Player 4 brings exactly 1 Zergling to Location 4
  • Player 5 and 6 bring exactly 0 Zergilng to Laction 3
  • Actions

  • Then it is determined that player 4 is the closest


  • Then repeat this for each location and each player.

    If two players are the same distance, as in p5, and p6 are both in location 3, then I'd just say that p5 is the closest. Tie just goes to one of the players.

    That's my idea, I was wondering if there's a better or more accurate way to do this? Or would this work just fine?

    Thanks for your help guys



    None.

    Sep 26 2017, 5:03 pm Roy Post #2

    An artist's depiction of an Extended Unit Death

    This would be a sufficient implementation for your requirements. It's worth pointing out that you can use the same set of locations for all players, so the number of locations you'll be using won't increase with the number of players.




    Sep 27 2017, 2:06 am m.0.n.3.y Post #3



    Quote from Roy
    This would be a sufficient implementation for your requirements. It's worth pointing out that you can use the same set of locations for all players, so the number of locations you'll be using won't increase with the number of players.
    Awesome thanks Roy!



    None.

    Options
      Back to forum
    Please log in to reply to this topic or to report it.
    Members in this topic: None.
    [2026-7-18. : 2:27 am]
    Symmetry -- https://staredit.net/topic/18903/ THE REVIEWS ARE HERE! "ok these are pretty good memes" - ssj9Kevin
    [2026-7-17. : 2:58 pm]
    Ultraviolet -- Symmetry
    Symmetry shouted: Man I wish we had this tech back in the day when people played ums lmao
    fr fr
    [2026-7-17. : 2:39 am]
    Symmetry -- Man I wish we had this tech back in the day when people played ums lmao
    [2026-7-16. : 6:28 am]
    NudeRaider -- EUD actions, specifically. The conditions remained. Today we can even have actions again, but they're all virtualized/whitelisted (not sure on the actual technical implementation) so you can only use them for specific intended purposed, not arbitrary code injections.
    [2026-7-16. : 6:26 am]
    NudeRaider -- I mean yes, maps - through EUDs - were theoretically able to do that as well, but that was patched quickly.
    [2026-7-16. : 6:25 am]
    NudeRaider -- Symmetry
    Symmetry shouted: Ohhh imagine a SC map that could delete itself
    not the map, the editor
    [2026-7-16. : 2:28 am]
    Symmetry -- I vaguely remember Voy doing some ACE back in the day, but I had no idea EUDs could do that kind of shit. I am very much catching up on the technology
    [2026-7-16. : 2:28 am]
    Symmetry -- Ohhh imagine a SC map that could delete itself
    [2026-7-15. : 8:51 pm]
    NudeRaider -- Symmetry
    Symmetry shouted: NudeRaider Is EUD editor capable of writing shit onto the player's harddrive? That seems like it would be dangerous
    yeah an editor that isn't allowed to write files sounds rather pointless, so I'd assume it can. Like most other programs too btw. and yes, obviously that's dangerous, but also kinda necessary. MS introduced that virtualization for exactly that reason.
    [2026-7-15. : 4:10 am]
    Ultraviolet -- I don't think so. I think they shut that shit down after 1.16, maybe even earlier
    Please log in to shout.


    Members Online: O)FaRTy1billion[MM], Excalibur