Alaskan_Son

...or, if you don't actually want them mulled...

Custom symbol.

This^^^ It is controlled by the Cabinets, Labels layer text style.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this? What settings are you referring to that don't currently save and that you need to "fiddle" with every time? This is an odd statement. A. They're new to Chief and definitely improvements, so obviously worth noting. B. They're really not minor at all IMO. Some of those items are MAJOR time savers. For a person who does a lot of terrains, the ability to trim terrain lines alone could easily make the upgrade worth it.

I can't answer your question without either violating a Non Disclosure Agreement or speaking of what I don't know, but I will say this. I would highly recommend you upgrade. In addition to the new X12 features that you've seen listed, there have been so many improvements over the last few versions...I don't see how I could personally ever go back. Plus, the learning curve during your eventual upgrade is only going to get worse.

Is there a specific Chief Architect modeling question, or are you just looking for general construction advice?

Thanks. It’s warmed up to about 17 below (F) where I live. And Dermot is right, my suggestion is probably more than you need. I read more into what you were asking them what was really there.

See if this helps you at all...

Just a thought, but you might look into joining the Beta testing team and see if the new Style Palette tools will do what you need. Not sure if they’re looking for testers yet or not, but I imagine it wouldn’t hurt to ask... beta@chiefarchitect.com

Put your CAD Details in...wait for it... ACTUAL CAD DETAILS!!

My recommendation is to simply adjust your drawing habits to eliminate those issues at the source.

Nope. Not possible. At least not without actually (and illegally) hacking into Chief’s exe programming code.

Regional or not, this is another example of a very clearly defined term. All one has to do is open a standard dictionary. I would argue that the real regional difference is simply in relative levels of ignorance (obviously willful in many cases). I called a screwdriver a “kyker” till I was 3 and my immediate family adjusted terminology to suit (and why not, it was super cute!). I don’t think our “regional” term was correct though and I assume my mother and father saw the wisdom in calling it a “screwdriver” when they were communicating with other people and when teaching my younger brothers how to speak.

Ya, I can agree with this. There are other methods that can be utilized too such as using the slab footing tool, using an invisible wall with a footing, or using slabs with CAD masks amongst others, but it would be nice if we could just add manually positioned footer material that blended into the auto produced footer.

The walls aren't actually getting joined. The coplanar line is just getting removed which I would personally prefer most of the time anyway. It happens with normal walls too.

Same method works at the ends of walls too...

The thing is that some of us feel compelled to help maintain some semblance of a functional language so that we can understand each other. It isn't helpful to anyone to purposely use 2 different languages or to refer to the same things with multiple terms. It can only serve to confuse and hinders productive and accurate communication. In fact, it defeats the real purpose for using those words in the first place. I see it all the time here on the forum...people can't find what they're looking for or don't know what a setting does because they're expecting or using different terminology. Sometimes the user is wrong and sometimes the software is wrong, but it becomes less and less of a problem the more consistent we are. Now don't get me wrong, I actually don't lose any sleep over incorrectly used terminology, and I screw things up too, but acting like it doesn't matter is just foolishness especially when we're talking about professional communication. We should try to stay on the same page as much as we reasonably can and I don't think we should fault people for encouraging us to do so.

If it's getting built as a single unit then as Gene was alluding to above, it can be done creating with a single cabinet (which is how I almost always handle it myself). It can also optionally be done by group selecting the 3 cabinets, clicking Make Architectural Block, opening that block, checking Treat As One Object, selecting Cabinet from the list of Schedule options. Then, in your Schedule, under Options To Include, make sure to check Other. This brings up some additional challenges to contend with and that I don't have time to get into, but hopefully that gets you started.

HAHAHHAHHAHHAAAA!!!!

Totally agree. I’ve heard people argue to the contrary that it’s a regional thing, but it’s not. It’s incorrect. It’s just become normalized in some areas. It’s the slow but certain degradation of the language. It started as Tray, it turned into Trey, and now I’m even seeing Trace in some places.

Top setting...Default Sets. The Annotation Set function has remained...just been renamed.

Here's another little detail that must be considered. In order for a Brick Ledge to automatically generate, right or wrong, Chief seems to need a framing layer to tell it where to stop cutting the brick ledge. In the example wall type you posted above, you won't be able to get an auto generated brick ledge at all unless either; A. You force one by using a sneaky wall definition for your Slab Footing walls below (I believe this is what you did and why your dimensions aren't generating like in Eric's example). B. You change the material definition for that Block layer to be a Framing type. C. You set your upper walls to be pony walls and assign a special wall type to your lower wall that exactly matches your upper wall but with a framing layer instead of a block layer. Just set the top of your lower wall to zero (or whatever your floor level is). -For scenario A, you should just have to change the "Dimension To" layer for that particular wall type. Note that this method doesn't actually produce a brick ledge at all but only addresses your plan view concerns. The 3D foundation won't be right and you may have to modify your section views to get them to be what you want. -For scenario B, you should be good to go for purposes of your OP, but you'll have other little issues to deal with if generating Auto Details, material lists, and/or schedules. -For scenario C you should have no problems at all except that you won't be able to use the Pony Wall definition for anything else at that level, and if you have a stepped foundation, you'll have to modify the lower wall top height in an elevation view. Hope that helps.

You shouldn't need to be moving anything to down to the main layer. As Eric pointed out above, it can and should work just fine. Post a quick plan, it's gotta be one of your other settings.

You have an errant wall up on the attic level. Delete in and you should be good to go.

Your problem is not the wall, its that you somehow managed to put 1,024 (one-thousand-twenty-four) doors in that wall instead of just the one that you actually need. Not sure how that happened, but group select and delete those doors from the wall and you should be good to go. I think you owe that wall an apology.