Finding architects - but how?

.... - why then definitely an architect's house?

Counterquestion: Why definitely build with a "house construction company"?

- it definitely exists, but for us our approach is fixed and we will plan with an architect. I don’t want to discuss this here now either, there are already enough other threads about it.

- I know that we took a risk, but we already bought the plot, even without an appraisal. However, we will have one done shortly. In the worst case, we will also build without a basement, instead with an expanded attic. We would have bought the plot anyway, the location is excellent and in that residential area there are no other plots left (oh yes, one more, 2,000m2 for a mere €611,000).

and Wanderdüne
I spoke again with the architect. He always quotes prices as gross because we are "end consumers." He is now getting us offers from a surveyor and a soil expert with whom he usually works, so we might be able to commission this before Christmas.
He is already drawing up a first plan that we will see before Christmas as well. Then we will meet and he will explain what he has in mind for each part, and we can think about it over Christmas.

the game with heights depending on the often-mentioned level top edge of finished floor ./. pushing eaves and ridge heights to the limit

What do you mean by that?

It's just my opinion - I could focus on the actual product and look for a suitable company - with all the advantages I mentioned - and wouldn't have to deal with searching for an architect, fee issues, etc. Even though choosing the house company naturally also requires some effort. I'm assuming from our perspective now: internet research, forums, prefabricated house exhibition (+ two solid house manufacturers), three providers shortlisted - and decided...

Sounds very reasonable. Good luck and keep us updated.

Hello, I wouldn't throw €2000 at anyone just to see if I want to build with them. Instead, have a look at some of their reference projects.

...properly drawn and not scribbled as a hand drawing on paper.

Well, a brilliant design, scribbled on grease-stained sandwich paper, should be preferable to you rather than the high-end presentation of average banalities.

...a first idea based on which we can decide whether we can imagine working with the architect. ...already better able to see whether a collaboration will work or not. ...explains what criteria can be used to judge the way of thinking, argumentation, etc. After only a one-hour preliminary discussion, that is really difficult.

I can understand you, the approach also sounds logical.
However, the procedure does not correspond to the normal process of developing a design.
If you base it on the service phases, then the initial service phases are the most important. Mistakes made here cannot be compensated later, and overlooked client requirements can send the design developed and almost finished in service phase 3 to the round file.
The mentioned price cannot include the required basis investigation. And then to start working on a design after only one hour is a waste of time.
Whereas the first design is usually worthless, but please not knowingly so.

From the feeling, I would now say that 2-3 attempts should be included without charging extra effort for them, or am I wrong?

There is no real limit to the number of designs. At the latest, when one or both contracting parties can only tolerate the meetings with increasing amounts of alcohol, they will part ways by mutual agreement.

In my opinion, it cannot yet be a basis for a planning approval. After all, neither a geotechnical report nor surveying documents are available. We also have not really discussed technology; insulation, etc., from which, among other things, the wall thickness depends.

See above, knowingly for the round file...

...sure, I’ll post plans as soon as I have a first draft, I want to make use of the forum’s collective experience after all

But first obtain the consent of the rights holder.

Otherwise, consider staged contracts, which I consider more suitable.