This is the first draft of my Europe trip. I'm interested in all these stops, but I won't be able to do each one. Which parts of this trip should I cut out? Or cities to add?
>American, 30s white male, comfortable budget
>Traveling by rail, staying in hotels, maybe some hostels
>Looking for pubs and other places to find decent conversations with locals, lively cities, nature, history
>Not looking for an exact route, just an outline with an idea of what to expect
My honest advice would be to go to Krakow over Warsaw. It's a much more interesting city plus will alow you to go to Auschwitz if you're interested (you should be).
fortnite dances in aushwitz is pretty fun
He should just skip Prague, Warsaw, and Wrocław and go to Krakow
not interested in a work camp, or fake zog history
I understand the want of going this large route to experience famous cities in many countries, but you’ll never see everything so don’t feel bad cutting down the route to less distance covered.
A tighter route can be just as rewarding.
The first tier tourist destinations are enjoyable they have the most famous cultural impact - but the second and third and domestic travel destinations are also great.
For nature you could find something everywhere but you’re at the alps imo they should be the focus
When you get to Budapest you’ll be mad you didn’t go there first
I'm hearing some very polar opposite opinions on Budapest. Can someone go into some detail on this place? What does a great day in Budapest look like? And if it sucks, does it actively suck or is it just too boring to recommend?
Vienna is great but Budapest is based in its own right. Go there. You won't be disappointed.
How long would you be gone, OP? That's the most important question of all. Your route looks like something in the range of 2-3 months to me. I just got back from Europe, so here's some of my advice:
>Paris has a shitload of things to see, but is a dirty ass city. Reserve a few must-dos in advance and stay just for a few days. I recommend Musee d'Orsay and scaling Eiffel for posterity.
>Go to Lucerne right after Paris, Bern and Zurich aren't particularly great swiss places for first time visitors. You'll have a much better time, I promise.
>Try visiting Ticino for a bit, I was absolutely enamored with it. Lugano is just splendid.
>You can do Milan in one day so, I'd recommend speedrunning to Rome and then leaping back up to Venice for two-three nights. You can get the rest of Italy with a dedicated trip.
>why the fuck are you going to Ljubjana? Just dip straight to Austria. I'd say Innsbruck or Salzburg to Vienna is preferable. I really liked Salzburg personally, but up to you.
>Skip budapest for now as well, you can do that later. Simply hit up prague after you're done.
>Unless you want to see Auschwitz-Birkenau, I'd leave Poland out for next time. You can get it and Hungary as a package later.
>Berlin>hamburg>amsterdam seems like a rational next set of steps
>Maybe brussels/bruges if you have extra time?
I don't know how long you want to be gone, OP, but I'd aim for a month of travel at most. You're going to be fucking exhausted after it's all said and done. Take it from me, I literally just finished a month today.
all of that in a month? I did a trip very similar to this earlier this year in around 3 months and it felt okay. Pretty tired by the end but a month seems way too short for a Europe tour. Just add some rest days if need be.
Skip Rome and Poland. Rome because the city demands more time, Poland because it doesn't.
It's really stress-free and he could probably find the lively city, pubs thing there.
>>Try visiting Ticino for a bit, I was absolutely enamored with it. Lugano is just splendid.
>> I'd say Innsbruck or Salzburg to Vienna is preferable
You were really knocking it out of the park here pal.
>Maybe brussels/bruges if you have extra time?
Lost me here. Belgium is a shit hole
you should cut out austria and hungary and go to Spain
Spain demand a booster.
I thought by train you dont need anything?
OP, you don't tell us what you're interested in which is the only way to give advice. If you're a cultural tourist, other anons are right that Krakow is the Polish city to focus on. Also consider Dresden. It also makes a difference if you're travelling in peak tourist seasons because Prague, Rome and Florence will be awful then.
Going to semi-echo a comment above and suggest that neither Warsaw nor (especially) Łódź have anything much to offer a visitor. Warsaw is pretty big and fairly lively, but also kind of ugly, and not very historic or interesting; Łódź isn’t even vibrant or all that big, just ugly. Kraków and Wrocław are both quite charming.
I also suggest that either Bern or Luzern might be a more attractive Swiss city to visit than Zürich, which I’ve always found quite boring, if you are set on seeing urban Switzerland; better still might be a trip uphill from Bern to someplace like Thun, which is substantially prettier than any of the above albeit very small. (Inb4 angry mountain people condemn the whole idea of going to any city in Switzerland; in either Bern or Luzern you’re in closer proximity to mountain scenery and side-trips than in Zürich.)
>Pic related is draft 2
Places to add on this route?
If you are interested in Germany I felt Hamburg was my favorite of Berlin, Munich, Hamburg. Would be worth seeing.
Innsbruck was comfy and beautiful as well.
Hello again OP, I am
poster. I've put together a map which I feel is superior in terms of sightseeing and beauty and could easily be done within threeish weeks. This is based on your apparent preferences from your post, as a way to cater to your specific interests.
>Amsterdam is really unique, only really comparable to Venice in terms of structure. Totally worth a visit, but even better if you're a dude weeder.
>Skip Hanover and go to Hamburg, it's a neat place to visit. Sorta like Amsterdam, but built on a delta-thing instead of a harbor.
>Berlin is pretty obvious
>Prague is very nice, definitely worth a few days' visit
>You can plow through Wroclaw to Krakow, maybe go to Energylandia while you're at it. Also make sure to visit Auschwitz to redpill yourself on it.
>I guess you can zip through Brno to Vienna, unless you want a break to just take in some low-key sights.
>Once you see Vienna, I hiiiiiiighly recommend going to Salzburg and/or Innsbruck as well. Both are extremely pleasant. You should see the Alps rather than Budapest on your first go-around.
After that, you can find yourself an airport to zip out from. Frankly, I would find some way to continue from Innsbruck to Switzerland, because that's one place you absolutely can't miss. You could perhaps go to Zurich by alpine train from Innsbruck (and meme a visit to Liechtenstein if you're cheeky) and make that your last stop, since it's an nice hub to exit from. To make some timing work, I'd cut out a stop in Brno and possibly Krakow since you might be better off doing a more dedicated eastern Europe trip later. You could spend 2-3 days per city and get to the three week mark comfortably, but I'd plan to have dedicated travel days on the front and back ends to ensure you can get to-and-from Europe without stress. Tell us more about what you're dying to see/where you want to spend the most time so we can prioritize your trip for you.
My advice is not to miss out on Budapest unless you'll come back some time. It's really amazing plus it's cheaper than most of the other cities. Plenty to see and do there as well.
budapest is just a cursed version of vienna
Would definetly skip it
>Looking for pubs and other places to find decent conversations with locals
Yeah it checks out