Electricity distribution appropriately?

As already described, many people also separate lights from sockets.

That is reasonable: then you are not plunged into total darkness immediately, but only the ceiling lamp or the floor lamp goes out, not both at the same time.

I would definitely not combine two rooms nowadays.

I think that is exaggerated, and as you yourself say

Likewise, stove/oven, dishwasher, washing machine each get their own fuse

it makes sense to orient yourself on the load there.

In the guest WC, the light along with the shaver socket is not worth its own fuse, whereas in the utility room it is better if the dryer does not also disable the freezer.

Outdoor sockets and outdoor lighting (to which a break-in tool could also be connected) I would combine together, but always protect and switch separately from everything inside; naturally, lighting that is to be controlled by the alarm system should be separate again.

In the bedroom, one has a clock radio and possibly a second TV, whereas the living room with all entertainment electronics certainly justifies its own fuse or several.

I basically agree with you that some rooms do not need their own fuse. However, I see it this way: how much does a 50 meter cable reel and a circuit breaker cost? The house is built once, and from various renovations I know that electrical needs can change. The few euros would be worth it to me to protect each room separately. The approach regarding the outdoor facilities is prudent and completely appropriate.

You forget the knock-on effects...

More circuits and breakers mean:

- More space needed in the cabinet and utility room

- More small parts (rails, terminals)

- More working time

- Larger documentation

- More sources of error

so costs on top of costs... it's not just more cables and more breakers

I basically agree with you that some rooms don’t need their own circuit breaker. However, I see it this way: how much does a 50-meter cable reel and a circuit breaker actually cost? The house is built once, and from various renovations, I know that the electrical needs also change. Those few euros are worth it to me to protect each room individually.

What you said about the outdoor facilities is prudent and completely appropriate in that form.

You haven’t started building yet, or are you still pretty early? This phrase "you only build once" ends up costing you 10% more across all trades if that’s enough.

I bought a house 7 years ago and almost completely renovated it myself after a fire damage. Now I am about to start a second project. And there are things that can be easily changed afterwards and there are trades that should really only be done right once. For me, this includes the electrical work. In 1960, people had different demands regarding equipment than today. That’s why it was built "economically". Today, old buildings regularly lack sockets, fuses blow, etc. And today’s new building will someday also be an old building. And regardless of whether one has different demands in 30 years, or has to/wants to sell the house: proper electrical work is crucial for the price. And if it fails because the fuse box has one more row and the rail cannot be paid for, then I would (but really just a personal opinion) reconsider my demands. What costs the most is the labor. Anyone can really pull cables if it follows instructions. I wouldn’t save on the wrong end here. The worst thing is a "I wish I had" in a few years.

We have a building from 1969 in our professional inventory, the condition is absolutely okay. Unfortunately, it still has 2-pole electrics, without any RCD. We need to tackle that... and it will cost. Since everything is installed flush. The really cheap option would only be the 1961 standard, everything nicely surface-mounted, so you can easily retrofit. - Therefore: if new, then do it properly here right away. Karsten