Floor plan of a single-family house with a gable roof, 1.5 stories - improvements?

I find roomsketcher very intuitive for first drafts... I also didn't get along with Sweet Home 3D. With roomsketcher, you can start online right away and can quite quickly show a floor plan and even walk through it in 3D.

Alright then, go for it you pencil drawers. I'll whip up a rough floor plan with the tool in 5 minutes. And I once created the furniture in original size and then there's this thing, Copy Paste, it's awesome! And if I want to place a room from the south to the north side, I don't grab scissors/eraser! Instead, drag and drop. Btw, it's 2018. Not 1988

I don't think much of paper and pencil either. Once drawn, floor plans can be changed much more easily, different versions can be saved and compared. They then reside in Google Drive and are always available. You can measure distances, calculate areas, place furniture, etc. in any program. The OP's hand drawing isn't worth the paper because none of the proportions are correct. The house needs to be replanned around the staircase, and the hand draft goes straight into the trash. In AutoCAD, I scale the staircase and see where the walls move.

I think we're getting quite off-topic here. But I also need to blow this trumpet once in a while.
I recently read about the entrance exam for architects. Almost 70% of the focus was on drawing and art. I no longer find that adequate nowadays. Of course, an architect should have a sense for harmony, beauty, art, etc. But they don't necessarily have to be a drawer anymore.
The programs do that faster and better today, and at some point, you have to arrive in the new era. If you can draw, good, but if you do it with programs, also good.

So basically, you’re saying there shouldn’t be threads with titles like "What do you think of my floor plan?".

Yes, but very welcome, especially with photos of scribbles on sandwich paper. You also take away the wrist’s swing if you use a mouse instead of a pen. The learning effect of erasing is much stronger than just clicking "undo."

Paper walls and dashed stairs don’t help either.

Even less helpful is when a plan supposedly proves in an early stage by pseudo-professional representation that everything “fits.”

The program is not supposed to pretend professionalism,

Unfortunately, that remains its strongest effect: the client falls in love with a non-functional model.

Also, I noticed with Sweet Home that you have to be very careful about how big the individual elements are set there

That is one of my main criticisms of the “professionalism” of such programs: if you release the mouse after a line length of 9.874 cm, the program simply writes 4.937 m wall length in the 1:50 scale. It doesn’t say: 4.875 or 5.00 m would be the closest whole steps in construction measurement. Someone who builds such plans would spend most of their wall-building time cutting stones.

And when you draw a window, the program does not remember the format and ask if the next similar window should be the same. Instead, it lets the wannabe planner run into the open knife by distributing twenty-two windows over seventeen different sizes.

So exactly where the beginner should be guided by the hand, the program quietly takes over its nonsense. A function like the program used by , transparently displaying the other floor’s walls in every floor plan, should be available for drainage pipes—that would actually be useful for the layman, so he could learn.

Or painting every stair step red on which you will hit your head. But already being able to recolor the carpet in a still non-functional draft, that’s clownery. Being able to enter your terrain heights—that would be useful. But what do these programs do instead? – they place every house on the same green Lego baseplate (and Katja is still waiting for the poster’s plot)!

In AutoCAD, I scale the stairs and watch where the walls move.

Yes, and—does a client want to apply as a draftsman?

I just have the impression that with many people who use a program, the brain gets turned off. When it comes to counting boxes, that's rather not the case. Objects are taken over without checking whether the size is correct (also with stairs, for example), while the pencil sketcher informs themselves beforehand about the required size of a stair. If you take that from the program, then it should be correct, right? (At least that's often my impression). And my designs are still on Google Drive

I have nothing against (good) programs (although sweet Home, in my opinion, does not necessarily belong to that), but sketching is more direct.

And I am very much of the opinion that an architect must be able to just whip up a drawing off the cuff. For example, I don't get the sense of perspective if you do it with a program. Overall, I think it's very good that there are now these entrance exams for architects as a selection criterion. When I had my Abitur in hand, it was purely based on the Abitur grade. And people who maybe just barely passed their Abitur but could design brilliantly had no chance at all (but that's also a topic for medical students).