Wishlist

Sunshades should be hidden in some views, this should be achived by mvo like other window components, for consistency and efficiency 

Problem: Back referencing within a Drawing Title is limited to Layout ID only; it does not offer the ability to back reference other fields of the back referenced view.

Scenario / Use Case: As a firm standard, we want to back reference to a specific detail or view, not just a Layout. For instance, we want the Drawing Title of "Section Detail" (G3/A550) to back reference the wall section from which it derives: "Wall Section" (B2/A350). As it stands, we only get the "A350" of "B2/A350" (see image: red is what we don't currently have the availability to add). Archicad knows the Drawing ID, because it lists it in the window that opens when you click "Back Reference..." in Drawing Selection Settings.

Wish: For more fields to be available to back reference, each individually toggle-able (so you can have just the Layout ID, just the Drawing ID, or both). Or, even more combinations if more fields become available.

Hello,

I would love to have the ability to link image fills with surface cover fill backgrounds. The idea is that when different surfaces are assigned to slabs, the corresponding floor plan would automatically display the matching patterns. Archicad, could we make this dream a reality?

I think the complete orientation of windows and views should be upgraded.

In the working window, the orientation function is limited to compile the last different orientations set during the drawing session.

but for it to be efficient at the least it should be possible to name and save an orientation as a reference in the project. Look in the image, in my project 2 orientations differ of 0,03°. Which one is the good one? If I draw walls locked on X and Y but using those 2 orientations from time to time my connection wouldn't be perfectly 90° which can be cumbersome when dimensioning things later.

I should be able to set a "north wing" orientation and a "east wing" orientation  set once and for all through the project. This could also used in views in the sheets where I can set a plan to orient itself from one of those named views.

I used Revit for more than 10 years and this feature (crop box) is build in since the birth of this very good tool. I'm using Archicad now and happy with it now. I don't want to light up a discussion detailing the pro and cons between those two very good software. But for a so basic function in a building modeling software like the one we use each day, this have to be implemented ! Please.

Hi everyone!

Element ID Manager can be extremly helpful, but its potential feels limited by the fact that it can only use Library Part Parameters as criteria.
If Properties could also be used for filtering and assignment, it would unlock a much smoother and more flexible workflow, especially in larger projects.

Is this something to consider?

Hi all,

I would like to request an improvement regarding the way measurement units are assigned and controlled in Schedules in Archicad. At the moment, Schedules are entirely dependent on the global project settings, namely Dimensions and Calculation Units defined in Project Preferences. While Dimension Units can be partially controlled through View Settings, Calculation Units cannot, which creates a major limitation in real quantity take-off workflows.

Because of this restriction, in many practical situations we are forced to keep certain schedules on Manual Update, and every time a schedule needs to be refreshed—which happens very frequently during design development—we must first go into Calculation Units in Project Preferences, change the unit system there, and only then update the schedule. This process is repetitive, inefficient, and very prone to human error, especially in larger projects with multiple schedules requiring different unit systems.

At the very least, it should be possible to define the measurement units independently per Schedule. If unit control per individual element or field inside a schedule is not technically feasible at this moment, then a minimum solution would be to introduce a Calculation Units override inside View Settings, similar to how Dimension Units are handled. This would allow each schedule view to operate with its own unit system, without forcing destructive changes at the global project level.

Thank you,

Victor

Current State

Under Project preferences, there are settings for zone calculation. These should be expanded, or, as in my proposition below, completely re-imagined.

These are current settings. Some countries have legislation that require different and more nuanced settings.

Deficencies of the Current State

This is an excerpt of one part of zone calculation rules in my country:

You don't have to understand much of Croatian (visina = height) to realize that there are many rules for zone heights, not just two. Zone categories require different rules.

Proposal to Expand Functionality

My proposal is to link zone calculation rules to zone categories and allow users to add more rules according to their needs. Rules should be editable in the same way that graphic override rules are editable. This would enable users to create rules based on the legislation or based on investor's requirements, taking custom properties into account. For instance, we currently have to manually add reductions for outdoor spaces (balconies, loggias, terraces, etc.) and this process can lead to errors. Applying custom rules would enable proper zone scheduling based on specific needs.

When doing a Reflected Ceiling Plan (RCP), I usually need to show the finish of the beams as well as the slabs or the ceilings. Even would like to show the colour or different fills if they have different finishes.

Also sometimes you have different heights for them and you struggle to have a common cutting plane for the whole floor to show all objects with the fill and still cutting the walls at the correct height.

Even when we use the beam tool for other things it is useful to have the flexibility

The ability to export and import all XML files at once would greatly improve coordination between Archicad files, especially in projects split into different files.

In these projects, it's not only important to keep the attributes in sync but also the project info, graphical overrides, layout book fields, IFC and DWG exporters, etc. It would also help with Template migration

Currently, there are at least 20 different places where XMLs can be exported in Archicad, and each one has to be done manually for each file!

When exporting and importing:

• It would be important to select which XMLs need to be exported (out of a list).
• The export should be packaged (perhaps as a zip file).
• When importing, it should be possible to view a list of the XMLs going to be imported and decide whether to append or overwrite existing options.

Thanks

@GabrielGG 

We have a Cloud Port print system that logs print jobs but when printing from Archicad the job goes through as "Untitled" so it will not be logged against a project - refer attached screen shot for print job list. We would like Archicad to send the project file name with the print job to allow for it to be properly logged.

Blue tint of 3D window with physically based engine is unesthetic, unusefull and completely unrealistic. Make possible to switch off coloring.

Currently, the text tool only allows a solid line for the text frame (text contour).

It would be a valuable improvement if we could choose any linetype available in the project file for the text frame.

This would make text annotations more flexible and consistent with the graphic language of the drawing.

I am an IT administrator who also looks after the company bimCloud.  When I ran our onsite server, I could login to the web panel and administer it.  But now on bimCloud, I need an Archicad seat to do my job for which I don't use Archicad.  So, in effect, if we are really busy and there are no licenses left, I need to revoke a license and stop an Architect working while I troubleshoot, fix, backup etc.  This is surely an oversight on a system that is intended to facilitate workflow, not hinder it.

Thanks, this is my urgent request.

Why can't we make "Launch a new instance of Archicad" the default if we want to? Every time I have to tick the box, seems redundant. You should at least give us the option.

Very regularly, I need to have multiple views of the same Story / Elevation / Worksheet.

E.g. with a different layer combination, or renovation filter.

Of course Clone Folders could be used to group them. Though often I choose to have separate copied views of a single relevant Story / Elevation / Worksheet, rather than cloning all of them. In this case we need to change the View Name to make them distinct.

I wish to use the custom View ID / Name like this:

So a combination of default 'By Project Map' as <AutoText> with a custom suffix or prefix for both ID and Name.

In this way  the relation with the view's source ID / name is maintained and is automatically updated.

The ability to use other autotexts from Project Info would be a good bonus.

The textures in archicad are applied based on a global/world reference point.

One example where this option would come in very handy would be:

When working with curtain walls independent panels can be created by either using distinct classes in combination with independent textures or building materials or by creating custom panel objects. Neither of these options however offer the possibility to link an "object" reference point for the applied textures.

We do have the ability to adjust the origin of textures, but apparently not when working on subelements, and even if this option would be available it would be useless in the above mentioned situation.

Having a surface, building material and where possible geometry based tick box overwriting the default reference point for texture would be great.

The Issue Manager in Archicad is a valuable tool, but it is currently too restrictive. Built-in fields such as Priority, Status, Type, and Responsible are hardcoded. Users can only change the values inside them, but not the field labels themselves, and no new fields can be created.

Workarounds, such as repurposing some fields (e.g., "Priority"), are confusing and not ideal. 

"Labels" are already useful, but they quickly become overloaded when used as substitutes for missing custom fields. and 

“Description” is not ideal either, as it cannot be exported as a separate column in Excel, making reporting inefficient.

Request:

1. Allow users to rename built-in field labels (e.g., use “Priority” as “Discipline”), or
2. Allow users to create custom fields (not only the value), and
3. Ensure all custom fields can be included in Excel/CSV exports.
4. Keep BCF compatibility by treating custom fields as extensions without affecting the core schema.

This improvement would make Issue Manager far more powerful, flexible, and relevant to real-world project workflows, while reducing reliance on external platforms for basic customizations.

Thank you. 

Currently, when creating door schedules in Archicad, the door leaf dimensions are correctly reported for single-leaf doors. However, for double-leaf doors, the schedule only displays the total width of both leaves combined, without distinguishing between the individual leaf widths.

This approach can lead to misunderstandings, especially in the context of technical documentation or coordination with manufacturers and contractors. For instance, in asymmetric double doors, it is essential to communicate clearly the dimensions of each leaf (e.g. 900x2315mm + 400mmx2315mm), rather than a single combined width (e.g. 1300x2315mm).

Proposed improvement:

Introduce an option or parameter in door tool that allows users to display and differentiate the width of each individual leaf in a double door configuration. With just a number, Leaf 01 and Leaf 02.

This would significantly improve clarity in project documentation and better reflect the actual door details.