yo /trv/,
should i do this trip through europe, or a trip that's exclusively through great britain? i can't decide which one to do, and i want to see them both...
Personally, I would stop in belgium, replace amsterdam with copenhagen, and only stop in florence in italy.
Lol wtf us in tyrol
why would you go to Tyrol but not Vienna?
that depends on how much time you have, for the trip you posted I would at least take a month. seeing the highlights in britain takes a week or two and then you've still only seen highlights
So Italy-centric.
In Belgium stop in Ghent, Brugge or Antwerp (definitely not Brussels). On your way from Lucerne to Paris try including Strassbourg.
>>1063831
on your way back i would recommend a few hours in perugia.
>contiki tour
>>1064746
lol no
stay away from belgium
its a shithole
Decent choice of cities. But do the "2"'s mean that you want to stay in these cities for 2 nights and then do daytrips to the red dots? Because that seems VERY stressful, so I'd rather recommend you on focusing on less stuff
>Pisa is lovevly, but if you only have 2 nights in Florence, stay there, there's enough stuff to see in Florence
>something similar goes for Dresden. Probably the most beautiful city of Germany, but if you're in a rush and that takes away your time in Berlin and Prague, I wouldn't bother going unless you have to change transport there anyway
>I'd cut out Lucerne, Switzerland is beautiful and expensive. You get the Alps feeling in Austria
>safe time and fly from Amsterdam to Berlin, nothing exiting to see between these. The Ruhr Valley is/was economically important, but not beautiful.
>I'd also fly from London to Amsterdam unless you're going to spend a night in Belgium (Bruges Ghent)
>since your time is limited, maybe you should not go to Venice and spend two nights more in the other cities
>Contiki
You're doing it wrong OP
Do not spend $200 a day to rush around Europe
>>1064746
Yea, same. Bruges for example is really worth visiting.
