SC2Mapster

This is a bit nit picky, but which is less laggy:

1. Target Buff that expires in 1.5s and then is reapplied by the caster using a search

2. Target Buff that uses a 'Caster not within 5 Range' validator to remove the Target Buff.

It depends on how much overhead the 'Caster not within 5 Range' validator uses to constantly check.

So which is the better choice? I will apply this scenario's logic to a lot of my buffs.

plz tell us what you are trying to achieve, hard to tell if you are on the right track in the first place

@FunkyUserName: Go

1. Caster does a search for allies within 5, to apply a target buff. the search runs on a 1.5s period.

The target buff expires in 1.4s. (like a guardian shield)

2. Or, I can have a validator on the target buff, to check if the caster is no longer within range 5, to remove the target buff.

@greythepirate: Go

Just a caveat. Behaviors lag when you get into the thousands. Creating units (via any means) also creates lag if done in large quantities. Lastly, auto-cast abilities add to lag. This lag is based on a lot of factors (auto-cast range, targets to check etc) but the biggest contributor is how complicated the auto-cast validator is. Other than that, yeah, data is pretty free of any lag. Even with the examples I gave, you have to really do them en masse before you notice any slowdown.

@TyaArcade: Go

I am doing them en masse. I am deep into the thousands.

With a handful of casters doing buffs, its no issue, but I have many. That's why I search for the most efficient methods.

Your information was extremely helpful. I will refocus my attention on the autocast vals.

As for this thread:

I think I've concluded that doing the range 5 validator to remove the target buff would work better than having the target buff expire and be reapplied by the caster -to avoid doing another autocast pass.

@DrSuperEvil: Go

I cleaned up the wording on my posts, it should be more clear now

edit: ah.. i forgot to put the word 'not' within range 5. I think that was causing confusion. sorry.