Wishlist

When a Bimx model is uploaded to the "Bimx model transfer site" not the local / user time is displayed as upload time but another time (I suppose the server location time). This is confusing since I use this time when using the same version name. Please display user specific / local time as upload time. 

Also the time and date format should be as local used. We do not use AM and PM and we write first the day then the month.

Heres the problem: When moving the origin of a fill or cover fill, one has to grab the fill handle. However, when the fill handle is set on top of a node of that same element, one cannot grab the handle without moving the node. So it's move the node...move the handle....and then move the node back.

Here's what I propose as a solution: Add the fill handle button to the pet palette if they are in the same location. When you click on the node you get all the typical options for that node and you get the option to move the fill handle.

See screenshot below.

Hello! 

It is a well known fact that there will be trouble if you have scattered elements/objects in your Archicad-file - Far From Origin - Troubleshooting Guide - Graphisoft Community

In Solibri you have a warning if you open an IFC where this is the case - Widely Scattered Models – Solibri Desktop Help Center

Is it possible to implement a similar function for Archicad? 
For example:

• A warning when you import something and it is FFO
• A checking tool that locates and identifies problematic elements/objects

It would be extremely helpful to introduce the concept of Reference Levels in Archicad — similar to Revit’s Levels — which are non-structural, non-story markers used to define key vertical positions in a model (e.g. ceiling heights, parapets, window datum lines, etc.).

These levels would not function as actual stories, and would not be exported as separate floors in IFC, but would provide a consistent and visible reference for modeling and coordination.

Proposed Implementation:

• Add a new category of levels in the Story Settings dialog, called Reference Levels

• Reference Levels would:

  • Appear in Section/Elevation views with custom markers

  • Be usable as snapping and alignment guides

  • Be selectable in element settings (e.g. set top of wall or beam to “Ceiling RL +2.7m”)

  • Not generate story markers or impact IFC story structure

  • Have their own layer or visibility control

Optional extras:

• Reference Levels could be grouped (e.g., Ceiling Levels, Façade Datums)

• Could be color-coded or styled differently from real stories

Why This Is Important:

• Improved Coordination: Ceiling levels, bulkhead lines, parapet heights, etc., can be defined and referenced clearly, without cluttering the Story structure or requiring dummy stories.

• Cleaner IFC Export: No need for fake stories that confuse consultants or clash with structural models.

• More Accurate Modeling: Allows modeling elements like walls, ceilings, and beams in relation to a defined height, not just the nearest story or manual height input.

• Industry-Standard Workflow: This aligns with how many multidisciplinary teams work — especially when integrating with Revit-based consultants.

Example Use Case:

In a commercial building:

• Ground Floor is at 0.00

• Ceiling RL at +3.200

• Bulkhead RL at +2.600

These are critical modeling guides, but don't warrant actual stories. Currently, workarounds like 2D lines or fake stories are used, which are not robust or parametric.

Hi Graphisoft, can we please return to the original Roadmap ?

For those wanting to see what was originally proposed, please watch this presentation near the end of the video.

https://www.digital.skewed.com.au/blog/graphisoft-releases-public-archicad-roadmap

Thank you for your consideration.

Problem: When placing elements, it is not uncommon to place an object that doesn't appear, only to realize that it has been placed to a different story.

Solution: Tools default to placing objects to current story. This can be changed using a drop down, but they always default to the current story.

I don't know about others, but it's very (very) rare that I will want to be viewing one story and placing an element on a different one. Anyone else?

Problem: the two current options for profiled curtain wall frames create unnecessary workarounds/steps. "Profiled Frame" is great, but it requires a Frame and a Cap (not all frames have a cap). "Profiled Butt-Glazed Frame" is obviously good for true butt-glazing conditions, but it is also the workaround when a frame with a single profile is desired (no cap), however the limitation presents itself when a Simplified 3D Detail Level is used:

It appears that the "Profiled Butt-Glazed Frame" only considers geometry on the interior side of the glazing when a simplified detail level is active. Good in theory, until this frame type is needed as a workaround. So now what I'll have to do is split my custom profile in two, using one half of it as the "cap", even though in reality it's a single extrusion.

Scenario / Use Case: basic storefront systems (at least in the US) have both 1- and 2-piece frames (not butt-glazed), such as the head and jamb as seen below in the manufacturer details:

As it stands, we can't create a single profile to accomplish these conditions, without the simplified view looking incorrect (we use both levels of 3D Detail, depending on the view scale).

Wish: that a third type of profiled-frame be added to the curtain wall tool, which would allow 1-piece frames that appear correct in both "Detailed" and "Simplified" 3D Detail levels.

Hello , 

Instead of the buggy " zone linked elements " function inside ArchiCAD, which automatically detects elements placed inside or at the zone boundaries, it would be very nice to have manual link possibilities , 

a big slab that covers multiple zones could be linked to them all, 

i can choose to which zone i want to link a wall , or a dorr, manually , 

Ceiling Tool + Extended Zone

For a while now, there has been a need for a dedicated ceiling tool. I will use the example of a suspended ceiling below, but that is only one part of it.

Yes, we have all kinds of third-party add-ons but they tend to be extremely complex and, of course, only limited to the products from a specific supplier.

Off the top of my head we need the following functionality:

Want to be able to draw the suspended ceiling as a polygon/rectangle, but also be able to connect to a zone (accessory?)

There is also no possibility to add a value for ceiling height to a zone or similar. This is quite important and should work similar to subfloor thickness. The zone should then be modeled from top-of-slab to underside-slab. A new parameter is needed to identify ceiling height (FinishCeilingHeight) - similar how we can set subfloor thickness (FinishFloorHeight).

For the actual Ceiling Tool (which is the primary scope of this wish)

We need to be able to control the following:

• Ceiling grid
  • Grid profile (including edge profiles)
  • Color
  • Mounting type (direct stick, suspended etc.)
  • Headroom clearance above support structure (important for MEP installation and servicing)
• "Void fill"
  • Ceiling tile
    • Tile size
    • Tile type (including swing tile type
    • Edge type
    • Color
  • Installations (could be placeholder items only)
    • Lighting?
    • HVAC?
    • Sprinkler?
    • Speakers?
    • Access panel?
• Must work with RenovationStatus
• Must work with DesignOptions
• Must be able to quantify on component level.
• Desirable to be able to control via MVO
  • LOD - a bit like Stairs or CW, which parts should be visible

Im sure there is more - but let's start here and see what gets added on by others.

I think we need a big update in the MEP library. No new objects since ..... I can't even remember

They can be pretty basic, but I miss a lot of 

- Valves (f.ex. 3 way valve, etc) with a schematic 2D diagram as an option

- Ventilation and Aircon equipment and units. (f.ex. VRV outdoor unit, ceiling units, 4 way ceiling unit,...)

Same applies for lights... a little update would be fantastic. 

When you duplicate a building material, the duplicate is selected in the list but if you change the name the original gets changed. 

This is illogical and gives a lot of trouble if you don't notice it.

Currently Properties can be used or Elements of the Building and for materials.

Compistes are combination of Materials that have their own Properties like maximal Fire Rating, Acustic insulation Vaues, Thermal insulation Values.

Having the ability to define Properties for Composites would allow to automate the quality of Modells.

Thanks

Gabriel

@GabrielGG 

Summary

The symbolic tree objects placed in plan should show a corresponding symbolic side view in elevation. 

Explanation

The tree objects all have various compromises when viewing in elevation. 

To my mind, the most appropriate visually are the type as below:

However, these 2D side views can only be placed in elevation, not on the model, and can only appear behind or in front of all the 3D elements. This means that if you have trees which should be in different planes (so, behind one wall but in front of another) this can't be represented. 

Annoyingly these objects, when placed on the model with a 2D symbolic plan view, have a height represented in the elevation view as highlighted below, but only as a rectangle:

It would be extremely useful to have this as being the 2D symbolic side view, aligned parallel to the elevation line. Especially as the options for the side view cover an acceptable amount of tree types for typical use. 

Alternatives

With the Detailed Tree, when the settings are high enough to look good, the elevation drawing PDFs end up being large files. With certain submissions via websites having upload limits (namely, planning) file sizes need to be kept to a reasonable size (not to mention it being just plain inefficient!).

The Simple Tree model is certainly better for file sizes, but the 'layers' which decrease in size to give the tree depth don't look particularly good, especially the ones perpendicular to the view just giving vertical lines. 

One solution I have taken to is importing a 2D DWG tree elevation, tracing it with the morph tool, then placing it in the correct position in the model to give the desired effect, then using a different layer for the trees in plan view. Whilst an archaic process for a BIM software, it does provide the drawing I want to see. 

Key improvements needed:
- Direct edit of modules in place.
- Fix labels positioning problems in mirtored/flipped modules.
- make it optional to add the embedded library to the .mod files (prefer not to add) or filter out embedded libs if they already exist in host.
- Make it possible to schedule the Module. Not just components of it. (I want to schedule which bathroom type goes into which apartment type)
- Make it possible to schedule and label mirrored modules.
- Modules currently remember their source storey. Bad idea, if I want to insert a new storey between 2 existing negative module storeys. Solution needed so a new storey does not mess up the placement of all modules 

- Option required to Not show .mod files as openable projects in Archicad start-up window.

Typically, it us a bad idea to open mod filesvand edit in separate Archicad, because it will surely mess up attributes. Not to mention,  that if you open stand alone mod-s, there is no way to see the context. 

Please also refer to (and vote) the below Module related wishes, where - as requested - I separated this complex wish into several parts.
Make Modules Great Again - 1: In Place Module Management 

Make Modules Great Again - 2: Embedded Library Management 

Make Modules Great Again - 3: Attribute Management 

Make Modules Great Again - 4.0: Schedule Modules 

Make Modules Great Again - 4.1: Schedule Mirrored Modules 

Make Modules Great Again - 5: Modules Source Storey 

Make Modules Great Again - 6: Labels in Mirrored Modules 

For the Norwegian (and other scandinavian/cold countries) it would be handy to have the ability to assign outside and inside areas of a roof.

We tend to have a lot of insulation, but there is no need for insulation on the outside. If the roof tool had an extra feature where you could draw a fill/area to designate a separate zone for a separate composite, the roof tool would be much more useful. As it is, using two separate roof objects is suboptimal.

The Problem: (see screen recording attached which includes two "Enters") You open up a tool and search for something. You close the tool. Then you select something that tool makes (like the object tool makes objects). You use your keyboard to tab through some settings, maybe from a drop down, then hit enter to select. That setting is selected. You hit enter again to select "OK" and close the window BUT instead of OK and closing the window, you've suddenly switched from the object you were editing to whatever you were searching the library for before. You proceed to pull your hair out.

The Solution: Even when the search is active (with a cursor), a second Enter closes the window instead of selecting a library part in the sidebar. You leave your hair in.

Has anyone else encountered this problem?

It would be useful if element surfaces were linked to design options. This would be especially helpful for apartment block designs, as the Hotlinked units are the same across the various floors, expect the exterior cladding typically changes.

Currently you have to create whole new walls and assign these to different options. This becomes cumbersome when changing windows and doors, and is confusing for less experienced users.

Please allow the creation of full bullnose or fillet edges for slabs. Currently, the Morph tool is very limited for oval or rounded shapes — it is extremely time-consuming to adjust and often impractical for precise tabletop forms. Custom profiles do not even work with slabs, which removes another potential solution.

The Slab tool already offers edge types, but only straight or angled edges. It is unclear why a simple bullnose option is unavailable, while Morphs can achieve it.

This feature would greatly improve workflow efficiency and modeling accuracy for architects. For reference, I have attached an inspiration photo showing the desired edge types. As you can see, there is many.. all we want is simple bullnose option the least. 

Thank you for your time and considerations and helping us!