...you are completely safe...
Most likely didn't want to risk the structural integrity failing. As is it is hanging off the side of terrain blocks and has no direct vertical connection to bedrock anywhere in the built up portion of the "base". Extend it out to 2 or 3 blocks deep and the entire thing has a very good chance of collapsing.Also I'm curious why you didn't go for a bit more overhang to have more space on top?
Most likely didn't want to risk the structural integrity failing. As is it is hanging off the side of terrain blocks and has no direct vertical connection to bedrock anywhere in the built up portion of the "base". Extend it out to 2 or 3 blocks deep and the entire thing has a very good chance of collapsing.
Either it will definitely collapse or it definitely won't.
For the first part, if you look there is a fair bit that isn't connected to stone, but to gravel and relying on the sections to the side of the gravel ones to provide support.OP said "And remember to extend to bottom of the wall to fi[r]st stone block", which I took to mean that the wall is suspended from stone blocks, not dirt blocks, which should be able to support a bit more.
I'm also kinda confused by your "very good chace of collapsing". SI is not a probabilistic system. Either it will definitely collapse or it definitely won't.
What is this 8 block limit...? I think I've seen it mentioned before, but .. it's not a thing?is kissing the 8 block limit anyways.
Good info and thanks for testing, but what is the structural integrity/support capability of topsoil? That is the topmost layer that the wall is attached to (except where it is attached to asphalt or gravel). The cobblestone/concrete (I think the base was painted, you can see cobble colored plates on the "stair" portion) is attached to the top layer of ground, and last I knew that is the part where the calculations are done from since the wall itself does not have a direct line to bedrock.Just tested in 19.5 b60.
?All the sides of all blocks attached to bedrock are carrying the attached weight. You can create a massive stone platform on one steel support block surrounded by 4 steel blocks to spread the load. (A single steel support attached to stone faces would be limited to the carry capacity of stone. Adding four steel blocks to the sides of the support increases the amount of stone-steel carrying points threefold, allowing you to carry roughly 1200 weight of stone, or 120 blocks)
As such, the plates will carry from the stone layer just fine, the dirt layers add a little, but not really significant (20 weight per face)
It's oldish info, but it is the most recent I recall seeing other than your test.If this is the limit you're using, then it wouldn't apply as the fort in question seems to be using stone(concrete) blocks?
The question mark was me trying to figure out how the platform and horizontal "pole" examples would apply to a vertical column withRight below those examples "WARNING: A lot of this has changed since Alpha 13 and may not be relevant anymore."
It's completely outdated. Some of the concepts apply, but none of the numbers.
For your question mark.. I started to answer "how much does dirt carry (20 weight = 4 wood blocks = 2 stone blocks = 1 iron block) and ended up giving a condensed explanation of a part of the SI system. It's likely a little dense to read, just load up a new navezgame game and start messing with the creative menu.