Exterior wall for KFW 40 (+) with or without ETICS?

Would you like to elaborate on that a bit?

It's just plastic! ETICS is Styrofoam with all its advantages and disadvantages. You can't drive a nail into it.

It's just plastic! ETICS is Styrofoam with all its advantages and disadvantages.

Maybe a little more nuanced. ETICS can be "plastic" like EPS/PUR/XPS, but also phenolic resin, hemp, wood fiber, or even mineral wool or mineral foam. Then you would have an ETICS along with masonry that is fully mineral, thus analogous to monolithic.

Since I want to go for KFW 40 (Plus), he told me that I would have to go for 24 perforated bricks + 18 cm ETICS! (Additional cost here €1800).
What would you recommend? Is ETICS still "up-to-date" or is it no longer done? [...]
Since I also wanted to know prices for purely monolithic construction, I was given the following offer (standard is 24 perforated bricks + 14 cm ETICS):

Leaving aside my views* on ETICS and on KfW4711turbo, from my point of view there is only one fundamental decision left for you:
A. You only asked about alternatives because of the surcharge or
B. You feel discomfort or other aversions against ETICS (where the KfW level does not only affect the wall structure parameter and possibly also correlates with a controlled residential ventilation system, where I will leave my view* aside for now as well). Then this answer A/B has to be found by yourself.
When deciding on the wall structure, also consider my "stone mantra" (there is no philosopher’s stone or devil’s stone, but there is a wall structure with which the installer has the most experience and with all others there is more potential for complications).
If ETICS is basically okay for you, then 4 cm more material thickness firstly really only makes a difference for the U-value and not for you personally, and secondly you remain with the basically practically identical wall structure (so you are not moving away from the master routine standard of the installer). In my opinion, you should only change the stone of the structural shell if the installer has roughly the same amount of experience with it (e.g. if he builds 60:40 with stone X/Y, but not 90:10). "Same" filled vs. unfilled stone is basically "unchanged" in this sense, but I agree with the expert opinion to avoid doubling up on filling and composite insulation, as I consider that "well-meant," naïve, almost foolish work.

*) man, use the search function, my thread history is full of it, and a large part of the two topic complexes ETICS and controlled residential ventilation is, on closer look, subjective

It's just plastic!
ETICS is Styrofoam with all its advantages and disadvantages. You can't hammer a nail into it.

How many nails have you hammered into your facade like that...?

We have 20cm ETICS here. If it's not some Slovak
baker slapping things onto the exterior wall, it's absolutely uncritical regarding durability and appearance when processed correctly, and the pictures hang inside our house ;)

With ETICS, you have a top insulated exterior shell with state-of-the-art U-values.

With ETICS you simply have a top insulated exterior shell with state-of-the-art U-values.

Although you can also get it monolithic. Personally, I find that concept much more appealing. The fact that you can easily hang a mailbox and an outdoor lamp anywhere is a nice bonus. ETICS with polystyrene is of course the cheapest, but then you have polystyrene on the wall. I find that absolutely not up to date. And the alternatives listed by are somewhat more expensive than polystyrene.

What is so bad about the Styrofoam? You can still thermally recycle the ETICS even after it has protected the climate for 50 years through its insulation effect. That’s what I call a cool eco-balance. The YTONG huts with gas condensing boilers are the worse climate offenders and worth a local FFF demonstration.