
A lot of people claim I'm moving too fast. Throughout the trip, Ive only spent a little time in each country. Its true that this approach is more logistics-heavy and more expensive. However, if I don't know when I'll have four months to spare for a trip again, it's worth seeing as much of the world as I can so I'll know what I most want to come back to. I'm basically running around this huge lovely buffet having a taste of everything.
I like contrasts. I like being in Switzerland one day and Italy the next. I like how Cairo can make Athens seem quiet, clean, and peaceful.
I also like seeing themes and trends. I've watched the British Empire, Islam, Buddhism, Christianity, Alexander The Great, World War II, The Roman Empire, building techniques, aesthetic styles, the desires of Western tourists, and various other forces affect vast swaths of territory.
I do tend to be options-oriented as well. I prefer knowing a little bit about a lot of places as opposed to knowing a lot about a few places.
However, given that packing and unpacking has a fixed time cost, and getting to know a new city's transportation network and a new country's language, money, and basic customs also has a fixed time cost, it seems like an excessive hassle to switch locations more than once every couple of days. I've done it many times, but I seem happiest spending 2-3 days in each location.