Roofing is a mess. Stability is not uniform across squares and wedges

Game mode: [Enter game mode here: (ALL)]
Type of issue: [Enter one of the following: Misc]
Server type: [Enter one of the following: PvE]
Region: [Americas]

Roofing cannot go higher than two tiers without running into various snapping issues.

I tried to build a circus roof with the new flotsam set, and it was impossible due to the pieces not connecting to each other. Inverted wedges do not always connect to their wedge counter parts, the inverted wedge corner just plain simply requires tiles on top to connect to, and even roof corners do not connect to roof pieces because they don’t recognize them as connections without floor tiles around them.

Yet, the moment you remove the floor tiles, the entire roof falls apart, so even if you manage to construct the roofing pattern, it does not stay in place on its own if you remove the “helper” ceiling bits. So building the circus roof is literally impossible.

There are many issues with roofing and I hope they will be addressed so that they behave in more predictable ways and share more connection points with each other consistently - not just with the floor tiles.

Also, wedge floor pieces and wedge roof pieces along with their inverted counter parts should cost less than the flat pieces since it requires a lot more of them to cover the same area, which often results in them eating stability at a rate that requires pillars where otherwise a larger area with squares would not require any pillars.

Wedges should cost either 33% to 50% less than squares in order for the stability to be correct (even) in terms of cost.

Uniform costs and more reliable connection points. That is what the building system is struggling with atm and desperately needs.

Please provide a step-by-step process of how the bug can be reproduced. The more details you provide us with the easier it will be for us to find and fix the bug:

  1. Place a structure with wedge shaped walls in a creative arrangement for adequate testing
  2. (Using the flotsam set) Place Wedge roof pieces on wedge floor tiles. Flat diagonal roof on square tiles. Where they form square edges, place the roof top corner. In between the wedge roof pieces, place the “inverted” wedge roof piece. In any other gaps that are larger, the inverted wedge corner applies.
  3. Now do the same on the next level. Apply roofing following the same ruleset as above.
  4. You come to a point where connections are impossible, the inverted wedge pieces do not want to connect to the wedge pieces, the roof top corner and the inverted wedge corner require floor tiles in front of them in order to be placed and in general the ruleset becomes less consistent the higher up you go. (Creating a circus top is impossible.)

(Circus top as in a large roof space without additional floors in between.)


Additional testing:

The “inverted sloped roof wedges” snap to “sloped roof wedges”. They attach to each other laterally, you don’t need to put ceiling tiles on top and connect them from there.

Inverted roof wedges do not snap to “sloped rooftop corner”, “sloped roof”. You have to build ceiling pieces in order to connect inverted roof wedges with them, otherwise you cannot fill in the gap between a sloped roof wedge and a sloped roof, for example.

However, when you remove the ceiling piece, the roof does not support itself with the pieces filled in and everything snapped together using this “helper method” caves in.

As a result, it’s impossible to build flotsam roofs larger than two levels. It’s impossible to build a circus top (a very open spaced interior space where the ceiling is very high).

Before Siptah, when you removed the “helper pieces”, the roof would remain connected even though you could not connect inverted wedges to any wedge pieces at all. But once you had everything in place, the entire roof would “stick” after you took down the ceiling piece/pillar ‘scaffolding’.

Siptah has messed up roofs. They now collapse entirely when you remove the scaffolding.

They are bugged - they only connect to each other in one case scenario - Sloped wedge to inverted slope wedge. That’s it.

If you require connections to the other pieces, the inverted slope wedges require the old method. But once you apply the old method and take down the scaffolding, the inverted wedges collapse. Meaning it’s impossible to build like you used to before Siptah. Very disappointing. :frowning:

I paid $25 for less functionality than what I could build before.

Also, no adjustment for wedges costing the same as squares. A wedge piece should cost roughly half of a square piece. Otherwise, you have to build pillars near pillars because that’s how fast they eat stability. They cover such a small area but eat so much stability.

Structural integrity is too rigid and it is not uniform. :frowning:

If you’re going to force such a broken system, why is there no server option to disable structural integrity ?

Very inconsistent snapping “rules” that have no workaround. Do you want to ruin the game for builders too, as well as PvE players with Siptah?

1 Like

Here you can see what happens with an irregular floor pattern. It is impossible to continue the design going up.
Going from the left of the image (in the missing teeth like portions):

Sloped Roof + Roof Corner. Requires Inverted Sloped wedges. Broken connection.

Next is a Roof Corner + Sloped Wedge. Requires Inverted Slope wedge in between. Broken connection.

Last is, Sloped Roof + Sloped Wedge. Doesn’t allow you to place the inverted slope wedge either. Also broken.

Do you see the rest of the connections are only based on sloped wedge + inverted slope wedge? This snaps together. Anything else and it is impossible to connect and finish the circus top design.

I also want to point out that in the middle and up two roof pieces, where the inverted sloped wedge and sloped roof meet to form a square alignment, you cannot place the roof corner on top of that. It refuses to acknowledge the roof tops as connection slots. You can only place sloped wedges. Again, broken connections. It also cannot take a square ceiling piece on the inner side, in order to try to place the roof corner on top of that. Doesn’t recognize that connection either. However, you can place the square ceiling tile going outward, stemming towards the landscape. Also broken.

This is a better view of the problem:

This is how it should look. The other side turned out okay but I am unable to replicate on the other side. Again, inconsistent rule set. Roof tiles are very poorly supported and it seems the least tested.

Structural integrity becomes a real problem once you try to place wedge pieces on the inside to follow the design. By the time you get to the missing connection piece, where you would actually need to snap a roof piece, you are at 20 durability and it’s impossible to snap anything to that piece. It’s a joke.

The structural integrity system is so, so, restrictive and again, it lacks uniformity. If forces people to build extra pieces (and build bigger) because of how clunky it is. It’s so rigid. I hate how it forces you to build squares instead of wedges. Do you know how boring it is to live in square interiors or stare at boxes just so you don’t have to deal with the wedges costing the same stability but needing twice the support?

Why don’t you have a server option to disable structural integrity? Why isn’t there a server option to adjust how much structural integrity wedge pieces cost, or anything that eats stability for that matter?

Why is the roofing so inconsistent?

The flotsam set is so nice, but look at how broken it is. It wasn’t thoroughly tested. Only basic shapes are supported. Throw in an irregular design and it shows how fast it was thrown together and released.

Do you see how elegant it is not having to fill in the interior with pillars upon pillars or cover it with ceiling + wall tiles just to create the same design that the roof pieces are supposed to accomplish? This is what leads people to over build. Interior spacing. Structural integrity needs to be much more fluid.

It’s fine when you build with squares, you get plenty of interior spacing. It’s when you add wedges into the mix where you run out of interior space. They should not cost the same!


Afaik, the issue is due to the inverted wedge pieces missing a socket.

1 Like

I think a lot of the roof pieces are missing sockets or have them inverted…In the final design, I ended up doing supports on the outside and turned it into a franken-build. I didn’t want to build scaffolding on the outside of the structure, but I had to make a choice between that and ruining the interior with pillars everywhere just to fit the inverted wedges. (The inverted wedge corner is also a pain.)

As a result I ended up with something bigger than I wanted or needed.

But least I could disguise the scaffolding to make it look like it was part of the broken ship motif, even though its only purpose was to actually support snapping in roof pieces.

It took me hours because when I finally got to connect a ceiling piece to where I would need to snap in an inverted wedge, or a roof corner, or anything else that wasn’t a sloped roof or a sloped wedge… Well, the ceiling piece ended at 20 durability and you couldn’t connect anything to it… It felt like a thumb wrestling contest with the structural integrity system.

I really wish I could disable it in server settings or limit its creative destruction potential.

A partial ‘solution’ if mods are an option is Pythagoras Support Beams - they seem to ‘transfer’ support in a similar way to walls, but horizontally, which allows spanning wider spaces. They can also play the same role as the sandstone ceiling pieces, without being so obtrusive. They do still show, but the wooden ones might look ok with a flotsam build.

Example with the wooden beams allowing me to span a wider gap:

If you imagine the spiked metal beams in this one replaced by the wooden beams, it gives some sense of what the concentric circles option might look like:

(There’s also a set of those beams embedded in the top of the Aquilonian walls - the wooden ones would stick out more visibly from the side because they are thicker (but not as deep))

1 Like

Thanks for such a detailed listing of these problems, I never could get around to such an in depth analysis.

I only recently noticed that finally the inverted wedges can now all (or those I tested) used with their tip as snap point and was amazed they finally made it work (long time this only worked with thatch roofs).

I too would be delighted if the stability issue of wedges would be adressed. Wedges cover a bit LESS than HALF a square, but take the same stability, thats just not right.

And of course easy roof building with all the roof parts, without scaffolding and pillars en masse would just be great.

Hey there,

We’re aware of some issues with the building pieces listed and they’re on our team’s to-do list.
Thanks for the feedback and apologies for the frustration.

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.