Joyce

I prefer to see a lot of a local area. An advantage of this is I don't have to pack each day or waste valuable time traveling from one place to another. It seems that a majority of travel questions refer to the "see the world in a week" sort of travel. Do these travelers have more questions or are there more of them? Anyhow, what's your preference?

carol

DEFINITELY prefer exploring one region in a little more depth.

Rex

I think that the travelers who want to see London-Paris-Geneva-Nice-Milan-Venice-Florence-Rome have inherently more questions, and feel more helpless at the beginning of their "mental preparation process" - - in comparison to travelers who plan to go to northern Italy (and still might see just as many places - - in a 60-90 minute circle of Lake Garda, for example: Trento, Bolzano, Asiago, Vicenza, Mantova, Modena, Parma, Piacenza, Cremona, Bergamo, Sirmione and Bassano del Grappa. <BR> <BR>But the latter kind of traveling seems to attract those (Fodorites) who do more of their own reading and researching - - and don't string as many questions together into a (or several) message "thread(s)" here. <BR> <BR>Those who are taking their first time trips to Europe should not be put down for seeking the "other" kind of overview trip - - nor for asking (their "so-called" simple) questions of any kind. <BR> <BR>Best wishes, <BR> <BR>Rex <BR>

clairobscur

<BR> <BR> If xx=99, I do prefer touring 12 cities

John H

I think that touring multiple cities and/or countries is a very good way for a first-time traveler to get a feel for different countries, cities and cultures. With this background, a traveler then can decide what areas he or she might like to explore in greater depth. <BR> <BR>These days, I tend to travel with 5-6 relatives on my overseas trips. I do truly enjoy multi-city or multi-region tours for these trips, especially when with others are new to some of the areas being visited. However, I now try to stay 3 nights in a city/region, if at all possible. And, I plan my trip itineraries (not detailed times for activities/sites, but merely suggested activities/sites and even some restaurant bookings) and book lodging well in advance (beginning perhaps 9-months early) such that my trip is generally very pleasurable and relaxed when I am actually on the ground. Also, as I have found out on these selg-guided, multi-region tours, having a car makes traveling between cities much more pleasant and leisurely than doing it by bus or train -- one can stop on a whim, diverge off the main roads and go at one's own pace. <BR> <BR>I think getting the logistics right for a multi-city or multi-country trip is more difficult than for a single location. So, perhaps these people seek out more assistance to lessen that burden and/or to get the most "bang" for their touring buck. <BR> <BR>john

StCirq

When I first started taveling, I liked to cover a lot of ground in what I now think of as a fairly short period of time. I also tended to focus on capitals and major locations. As I've traveled more, I've come to appreciate the virtues of micro-tourism, meaning spending a lot of time in one locale, branching out with day trips and excursions, but also taking the time to explore the local grocery stores and mini-attractions, sitting in the town park, etc. I think the latter approach is kind of a luxury for folks who get to do a lot of traveling, but I also know people who are really focused on one destination, even if it's their first and only chance to get to Europe, who have an interest, say, in researching their family's history or have a tie to a particular area. I doubt such a trip would be a disappointment, as micro-tourism always reveals treasures that the Grand Tour cannot. That said, having taken many large-scale trips to Europe in my early years of traveling, there are more places I'd like to get back to than I probably will. And then there are all the places I haven't ever made it to. It's a big continent. One thing I have definitely realized is that I have a definite affinity for the countryside as opposed to cities. Even Paris, which I love dearly, I prefer to limit to 3 or 4 days. I have NEVER wanted to tour 12 cities in XX days, have never been on an organized tour, don't care to do so, but recognize that there is a huge group of people for whom that is the most comfortable option.

mimi

I like to travel very slowly and doing a city in under 5 days is much to fast for me. I do have the luxury of knowing that I will get back to a city or region that I like. The only quick trip that we did was the highlights of China in 24 days. I like to base myself in a city such as Paris and spend 9 days at a time there. I will visit museums, restaurants, and take some day trips out of town. We just spent 6 days in Prague and 5 in Budapest and it was not to much for each city.

Diane

I'm limited to two-week vacations, and from California it's a long trip, so I plan very cautiously. As I have traveled quite a bit now, I like to visit at least two countries. Once I flew to Athens with a stopover in London, another time with a stopover in Paris. This way I get to sample more than one culture per trip. Also, I now go back somewhere that I enjoyed and add one or two new cities. It is preferable to stay at least 3 nights in one place, and I have stayed as long as 7 nights in one place. Small cities/towns/villages are preferable to large cities, although I love Paris.

Diane

Oops. Didn't mean to send yet. I've learned that I enjoy time spent anchored rather than moving, so I try to see much in a short distance. After spending a week in Amsterdam we rented a car and drove to and around Belgium for a week. That was lovely. This time around we are starting in Belgium, going to the Alsace region of France, into the Black Forest, and flying out of Frankfurt. We'll see a lot with only one major day of driving. Whenever possible, it's desirable to focus on a small area and see a lot. This will give you the time to relax, meet the locals, sit at a cafe or on a park bench. Remember to always ENJOY your vacation, not just look at statues and buildings -- there's so much more to Europe than that.

Andrea

I have shamelessly stolen the philosophy of another Fodorite (sorry, I've forgotten his name), which is "I want to go everywhere I've never been." <BR> <BR>I have a running top ten list of places that fascinate me that I want to visit. That means that right now, after 2-5 days in any given city, the next activity/sight to see in that city is a LOWER priority for me than seeing my FIRST priority in another city. <BR> <BR>I have planned my life so that I do have the opportunity to explore places in greater depth. I (an American) have lived in Geneva and Paris, and am currently living in Shanghai. We are fortunate enough to have the chance to take 3-5 week-to-10 day trips per year, and we typically choose to divide that time with one or more destinations (e.g. Paris and Athens, Moscow and St. Petersburg). <BR> <BR>We want to see many, many different places. Personally, if I was suddenly unable to travel ever again, I would be happier if I had gotten just a taste of Milan AND just a taste of Nice than have only seen one city and never the other. <BR> <BR>We plan to return to some of our favorite places someday to explore them at greater length, but for right now, there are enough destinations in the world that we're going to continue with our "taste of [city]" touring. Each time we cross an item off of our "top ten" destinations, we add 3 more. It's a big world, and we want to see it!

Capo

My first three trips to Europe -- ranging from three weeks to six weeks -- covered a number of countries. I enjoyed that type of traveling at the time but, on all subsequent trips, I've just stayed in one city (with a sidetrip or two) or region and I've come to like that a lot.