Multiple Points For Multi And Hard Caches

October 19, 2005

After helping Madana place another multi-cache I got thinking about why people would even go after a hard cache as this when there are simple single caches out there. I was wondering if there was interest in making multi-caches count for multiple finds. Any comments?

Eric KF4OTN

6.5k · October 19, 2005

Maybe we could make short, simple, or 'easy' caches count only for a fraction of a 'find'?

October 19, 2005

YEAH!

7.3k · October 19, 2005

Hm, I may not be following you. I assume you mean multi smileys. A multi is already multi finds. Long (all day) mulit's are my favorite type of cache, assuming they're set up to take me on a tour of an area known and beloved of the cache placer. Although I have seen stages placed such that they were physically difficult, just for the sake of the difficulty, which doesn't especially inspire me. At any rate, if you're thinking of mutiple smileys for the find you can either allow multiple "found it" logs (which few folks will do- that is, log a cache more than once). Or, if the stages are more than .1 apart, list them as separate caches - each holding partial coords for the bonus (or final).

October 19, 2005

I don't see how this could work. I have done traditional caches that are much more difficult than some multis. I have even done a multi where you didn't even have to do the first stage in order to find the final cache if you read the hint! Should that one count for two smileys, while the micro that I spent 45 minutes looking for only counts as 1?

You might say we should use the difficulty system in order to mitigate for this, but the stars are so subjective that I don't think that would be possible either. One person's 4-star might be another's 2-star.

October 19, 2005

...Or, if the stages are more than .1 apart, list them as separate caches - each holding partial coords for the bonus (or final).

I just found my first multi done this way and it left me asking if this was OK to do. I assumed it was as all 3 stages got approved as seperate caches. I felt like I earned all 3 smileys as each stage was a different container, hidden in very different ways that took me about 2 hours to complete and a total hiking distance of about 3 miles. Thanks for the confirmation Isonzo.

5.9k · October 19, 2005

Are you asking about hard caches or time consuming caches?

38.2k · October 19, 2005

got thinking about why people would even go after a hard cache as this when there are simple single caches out there.

Because the the fun is in the hunt and when you get to hunt multiple stages it multiplies the fun.

was wondering if there was interest in making multi-caches count for multiple finds.

I guess what you mean is getting more "smileys" for each stage of the multi cache. I really don't see the point. Its one cache, one logbook and one smiley.

Edited October 19, 2005 by briansnat

October 19, 2005

I seem to understand it that if you want to amass 'smileys' you just go find as many 1/1 caches as you can - micro, regular, multi or whatever. If you enjoy the find rather than the quantity, people hide everything under the sun up to the daunting "5/5 - pack a lunch *and* a dinner because you ain't coming home early, chester." types of caches.

So how about "Find what suits ya, and enjoy doing it."

October 19, 2005

I see many easy single stages that you don't even have to leave the vehicle to get! But I don't have many people spending the time to go find my multi-caches because they actually take effort. I thought by giving the multi-caches multiple points it might make people stop and smell the roses. If you find a multi that has three stages, you get three points, etc. But that was just a thought...

October 19, 2005

Perhaps make your "multi" points full-fledged caches (assuming they are some distance apart - at least .10 miles), then making the "final" an unknown (?) cache with a location determined by visiting the other caches?

Perhaps even an interesting series, where one cache provides clues/info to the next, like this series.

Then again, with the second option you would have a series with a lot of creativity, planning, and thorough execution of placement that no-one visits since they are dreaded "puzzle" caches, no matter how simplistic the "puzzle." :blink:

Edited October 19, 2005 by Jeep_Dog

October 19, 2005

Maybe we could make short, simple, or 'easy' caches count only for a fraction of a 'find'?

Feel free not to log your easy ones and you can start deleting some you've already found right now. Don't forget to delete those you didn't find all by yourself unless your account is a team account - then be sure adjust your number of finds (finds / # of teammates)

:blink:

I think if you find a three part multi - you should get three "points" - one for each find. Why not?

The numbers don't count count for anything anyway. If you're into this for the numbers then you really need to look around more while out on the hunt.

I certainly am not serious here- just being silly :blink:

October 19, 2005

I think we could use some help from 8 yr. olds. They aren't so hung up on counts, only the fun of a hunt and trading treasures. A multi will get you 1 smilie. You know that before you start. Should you get 3 smilies for a 5 terrain rating? Smilie counts are nice but the fun is in caching. The most enjoyable cache, by far, my wife and I have ever done was a multi that took us 10 days of hard work to complete. And that was almost a record for this cache. If there is such a thing as a "destination" cache, this would be one. We were in awe of the layout that only became known at the completion. But it was the best time we have ever had caching. All for one smilie. See GCF85F--Like a river in my soul. Leave the ratings alone and go with the flow.

yoopers

October 20, 2005

Its not how many you have, but how many you had fun on. If you like easy caches, then go for micros, but if you like being in the outdoors and finding a really hard cache just for the satisfaction of it, choose a really hard cache. I once spent 3 hours looking for the first stage of a multi. (I still havent finnished it) I cache just for the fun of it, so who cares what other people do. They are not cheating other people, just themselves.

October 20, 2005

I guess I still don't understand the obsession with numbers some people have. I guess if finding as many as you possibly can in the shortest time possible is fun for you, go for it. A find is a find, though, and the fact that I only get one find for a harder cache or a multi in no way diminishes my pleasure in the hunt, nor my sense of accomplishment for finding a more challenging cache. What would be next? Deducting points for using a hint?

My advice, for whatever it may be worth, is to go out,enjoy the hunt and have a good time. Don't worry about numbers. It's okay to keep track, but when you are able to have as much fun with a DNF as a find then you have discovered the true zen of geocaching.

38.2k · October 20, 2005

I think the issue is that if I spend all afternoon looking for a cache I get the same smiley someone who pulled up to a Wakmart lamp post gets.

Since the average cache takes 10 minutes to find, I think we should get one smiley for every 10 minutes of searching. So if a cache is an easy drive up, you get one smiley. If it takes you three hours you get 18 smileys.

October 20, 2005

Since the average cache takes 10 minutes to find, I think we should get one smiley for every 10 minutes of searching. So if a cache is an easy drive up, you get one smiley. If it takes you three hours you get 18 smileys.

So, basically, you'd be rewarding incompetence! I like it!

Of course, there would be some side benefits of this:

- You would be encouraged to slow down and enjoy the surroundings

- Waiting out muggles wouldn't be so bad.. you'd almost be able to hear your smiley count going up

- Do a cache at 2 AM on the first Sunday in April and you get 6 free points (Daylight Saving Time for non-US folks)

2.2k · October 20, 2005

This opens endless possibilities... I once turned a six stage multi into eight stages by inadvertently finding two of the stages twice! This one

Maybe I should go back and "find" it 8 times to get proper credit for all the work I did?

8k · October 20, 2005

I think the question is "Why would you hide a hard multi cache when you you could hide several easy ones?" Joe hides 5 easy hides in Walmart parking lots while Mary hides a five part multi on a two mile long hiking trail. Over the next several months, each of Joe's caches are visited 50 times, Mary's cache has 3 visits. Who contributed more to geocaching Joe or Mary?

I'm glad that I can go to Baskin-Robins and get either a vanilla cone or a Pistachio Almond Fudge cone. I don't understand why they charge the same amount for vanilla as they do for Pistachio Almond Fudge

5.9k · October 20, 2005

Mary rocks.

4.1k · October 20, 2005

kf4otn,

Our cache Dial Out SG1 has the option to log each chevron (each is a regular cache with a log book) separately. Mainly because of the remote area this is placed in and it takes at least two full days of hunting/driving to finish. You visit 7 chevrons/worlds to activate the 8th chevron to enter the "Star Gate". If people only have enough time to complete one or two chevrons...we allow them to log them as single finds....(The First-To-Find log is awesome!)

The way cachers approach this time consuming cache is up to them. It seems to be working. Our main reason for making the rules for this cache, was because of the distance that has to be driven and the knowledge that most people will be on vacation that try for it - therefore they might not have enough time to do all 8 legs.

They are having fun - that is the main point to us...we do not care if they get multi-smilies or choose to make notes or push and do the whole cache in 2 or three days with one (or more) long log.

We have been told by other notable cachers that we should have just made separate - all to their own caches with a number behind each one.....what fun would that have been? A multi was the only way we would consider this one and our approver agreed.

That is the key, I think...to have pre-approve your Idea before placing it.

I hope this has helped you in some small way to make up your mind to try something that might not be considered the norm. Anything slightly different is not always bad...just interesting enough that it might be a very popular and fun cache for others to find and log.

Shirley~

October 20, 2005

Personally, I'm entertained by what one of our local cachers just put out (2 days after I started caching He placed 27 different caches around the city, 26 of them representing each letter of the alphabet, and the final one being a puzzle cache that you need most if not all of the others to solve. Each cache is a separate entity with log, and some of them are puzzles or multi's themselves. It's a great series around here, with a lot of local cachers meeting up as they hunt for each one. I was entertained because, since so many got released at once, there were 27 opportunities to be FTF on them, and I got three FTF in my first week caching.

Personally, I think the OP's idea is somewhat already taken care of. Yes, each multi only gives one point in the total stats, but when you look at what those totals are made up of, they are broken down by type. I know that someone who's done 5 multis, that means he had to search out at least 10 but often more different locations to log it, which makes it a different type of point. But really, the numbers may matter for some, but even just starting out...I'm in it for the fun, the numbers are just a small thing to keep track of myself.

Celticwulf

11.3k · October 20, 2005

After helping Madana place another multi-cache I got thinking about why people would even go after a hard cache as this when there are simple single caches out there. I was wondering if there was interest in making multi-caches count for multiple finds. Any comments?

Eric KF4OTN

For anyone who has completed a challenging multi-cache like "Snakes and Ladders" or "Ding dong, the witch is dead," they don't need multiple-smilies.

Just getting to write the log/logs of your attempt, and having bragging rights that you completed the task, is enough.

If a multi is done very well, people will seek it out instead of finding an equal number of 1/1 caches in parking lots for multiple smilies. And, they will remember that one cache, and its name, a lot longer than those single caches.

6.5k · October 20, 2005

Maybe we could make short, simple, or 'easy' caches count only for a fraction of a 'find'?

I think if you find a three part multi - you should get three "points" - one for each find. Why not?

The numbers don't count count for anything anyway. If you're into this for the numbers then you really need to look around more while out on the hunt.

Why worry about the count anyways? As you say it doesn't matter for anything.

You can give people parts, multiple whole, timers, difficulty equations, score number of people they meant while caching named bob, it really doesn't matter. Comparing peoples stats is never going to be something as simple as looking at flat numbers.

If you want to see if you're 'better' than some other cacher go to a competive event and run whatever course have been set up and bet them out.

Btw- when did they start making Pistachio Almond Fudge??

8k · October 20, 2005

Btw- when did they start making Pistachio Almond Fudge??

My mistake - I must have had a 2-part multi cone last time : pistachio almond + Jamocha almond fudge flavors

6.5k · October 21, 2005

Btw- when did they start making Pistachio Almond Fudge??

My mistake - I must have had a 2-part multi cone last time : pistachio almond + Jamocha almond fudge flavors

either way it beats vanilla

2.2k · October 21, 2005

You want numbers, here are 4 archived caches of mine. Please feel free to log as many finds as you want on them.

Owl's Head Fuel Stop

Oh When The Jeeps Come Rolling In

Pirate Invasion

Water Logged

October 21, 2005

Maybe we should revamp the total find count and smiley concept,and change it to a point system based on the difficulty, and tarrain rating.

You could still have your find count, but each cache would be worth a different amount of points so you could get an average points per cache score.

something like---a 1/1=2points a 2/2=4points a 5/5=10points etc.

That way 1- 5/5 would be worth the same points as 5- 1/1 caches.

Just a thought.....OBG

11.3k · October 21, 2005

Oh yeah, that'll work . . .

:(

October 21, 2005

olbluesguy said:

Maybe we should revamp the total find count and smiley concept,and change it to a point system based on the difficulty, and tarrain rating.
You could still have your find count, but each cache would be worth a different amount of points so you could get an average points per cache score.

something like---a 1/1=2points a 2/2=4points a 5/5=10points etc.

That way 1- 5/5 would be worth the same points as 5- 1/1 caches.

Here in Arizona there's a site that maintains a "leaderboard" of cache/cacher statistics based on an objective measure of difficulty--how often a cache is visited. The theory is simple: Even in recreational pursuits, people avoid effort. So easy caches get lots of visitors, difficult one get fewer.

His site's underlying program analyzes finds and divides 100 points/year among the finders of a given cache. So if 100 people/year find a cache, it's a 1-point cache; if 1 person per year finds it, it's a 100-point cache. The system is dynamic, so each new visitor (or passing day without a visitor) affects the point stats.

Those who care nothing for the numbers will care just as little for these numbers. But the site is a super resource for sorting caches according to their difficulty, remoteness, loneliness, etc.

There's a fun, pseudo-gambling aspect to it that intrigues me. I get at most two opportunities a month to do all-day hikes. There are many caches within 100 driving miles of home that I could visit. How to choose? Well, I can choose the highest "challenge-point" cache in that range. Or I can choose a cache that I think will appreciate in challenge points in the future, after the initial FTF race is over. Or, I can look for caches done by rival cachers above or below me in the stats, and take a chunk out of their points by finding one of their high-point-value finds.

I spend a lot more time anticipating the next hike than actually hiking, so this "Challenge Point" system has become a way to extend the enjoyment of caching. I think that's part of the psychology of the numbers game--you enjoy the hunt, and the statistical traces of the hunt. Like a fragrance on the pillowcase, it reminds you...

October 21, 2005

Now that's what I'm talking about .

You might have a lot of finds, or just a few, but now you can see what they are worth.

I have bookmarked the site for future ref.

OBG

:lol:

10k · October 21, 2005

The dolphin is cogitating and mulling over this question...

I have seen some excellent series like this. Splicingdan's Xzmzo comes to mind. Find the five caches, each having a clue to the final. The final, however is a Mystery cache. And we all know how cachers love Mystery Caches.

Comparing my caches, the rest stop micro has almost as many logs as my other ten combined. But, to me, it is the least satisfying. I put it there so I would have a cache that got some logs!

Plans are in the works for a multi. I thought about the concept for a moment or two. It is still going to be a multi. My Mystery Caches get few enough visitors as it is, and I want people to visit the area! So, multi it will be. (And stop tempting the dolphin with thoughts of more Mystery Caches! I've got two more of those nearing placement. They ought to get two or three visits in the next few months.)

Nope. Multi it shall be! Five stages. Hike a mile in in one of the most beautiful areas of New Jersey! Find your own way back out.

October 22, 2005

I also have one in the works that is both a Regular sized multi, and a micro combined.

It is also a daylight cache that must be finished in the Dark as a night cache.

I'm feeling Evil this week.

Edited October 22, 2005 by olbluesguy

October 22, 2005

My take on this subject is this:

If the find logs are complimentary and talk about how hard a cache is, and there aren't many finds, then this is the type of cache that's hard and is worth finding. Adding our find to such a list is credit for finding a tough cache.

Now the caches that are 1/1 and all the logs say 'found it in 1 minute' are the kind of caches that take us 3 trips to find.

:mad:

- T of TandS

1.5k · November 1, 2005

Now the caches that are 1/1 and all the logs say 'found it in 1 minute' are the kind of caches that take us 3 trips to find.

- T of TandS

Now T, tell us how many times this has been you?

Multi-caches if done right serve to expose you to a beautiful large park or something to that nature.

The best multi I have ever done was Greeopoly because it was about 8 stages and it exposed you to different and interesting places in the small little town of Greer, South Carolina.

November 1, 2005

You want numbers, here are 4 archived caches of mine. Please feel free to log as many finds as you want on them.

Owl's Head Fuel Stop

Oh When The Jeeps Come Rolling In

Pirate Invasion

Water Logged

Can I log em too? <_<

24.7k · November 1, 2005

One find per cache. A mutli typically has a bunch of caches. Fairly straight forward request. It's just another way to count. Similar to how the Skydiver Point System counted the lesser found caches for more.

The only flaw is when you find the last stage without the intermediate ones. Then you get say 6 'points' for finding 1 cache. That's happened to me before.

November 1, 2005

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE NUMBERS :huh: Its's about enjoying yourself. Just remember "IT'S NOT ABOUT THE NUMBERS

RELAX, and enjoy where they take you <_<

1.4k · November 1, 2005

I tend to think of each cache I go after, as it’s own little adventure. I think most people go after the simple caches because they are fairly easy to find, get to and does not take that much time. A single multi with multiple steps can be time consuming and many folks simply do not have the time to complete the cache adventure in a single trip SOOOOO it is much easier to grab the one in Walmart than go after that long one. I completed a very hard multi that took eight trips. My biggest problem with this adventure was TIME. I was only able to spend about two hours on each visit, that includes the hike in, searching then the hike back out. Weather you like it or not most people will always take the path of least resistance. With the plethora of caches available in my area I have planned the time consuming ones and guess what - I have every intention on finding them some time but if an easy one pops up you bet I will go for it first. To each their own.

November 2, 2005

Now T, tell us how many times this has been you?

OK, we think that it's been at least seven times:

One Answer Fits All, by you know who...

Riverwalkin

Elmwood Park, our second worse nemesis!

I'll Seek a Readier Path

Veteran's Memorial Cache

SC Peace Frogs 7, our greatest nemesis cache!

Unexpected Overlook

This is our Flailing Hall of Shame List! Well, really, most of them were my DNFs and were easy finds once S came along to help!!!!

- T of TandS

Edited November 2, 2005 by tands

2.7k · November 2, 2005

I want one 'find' for one cache experience. Everything else is DNF, notes or an SBA. I've never been on a multi where each point was a cache, unless you count the bird series in NH, which are 6 independant caches with clues to a final cache. They are still independant caches, miles apart...

8.9k · November 2, 2005

What do I win if I get the most numbers?

If I'm not going to win anything, why bother keeping score? Personal ratings?

If that's what you want to do, have at it. There's plenty of webspace available to set up your own page. Put descriptions of your caching experience on them, and rate them on fun, difficulty, time and give each cache (find or not find) some prorated multiplier to give it an experience rating.

Here on GC.com, it's just a cache page with the fact that you found it.

November 2, 2005

I recently places a series of 16 caches along a waterway.

It is 34 km in a direct line from the first to the last but would take over 100km to drive.

The first cache is listed as a Traditional and the others as Unknown/Mystery as they do not have the correct coordinates on the web page.

Each cache has a log book with the coordinates of the next two caches in the series so that the series can be continued if one cache is DNFed.

1.8k · November 2, 2005

His site's underlying program analyzes finds and divides 100 points/year among the finders of a given cache. So if 100 people/year find a cache, it's a 1-point cache; if 1 person per year finds it, it's a 100-point cache. The system is dynamic, so each new visitor (or passing day without a visitor) affects the point stats.

Oooh, I had no idea that site existed.

Evidently, my one cache hidden in Arizona is worth two challenge points. After reading your post, and perusing the site, I'm still not sure what that means. :huh:

But at least I can claim that I now have accumulated 301 challenge points...And, apparently, two FTF's, which is odd because I've never scored an FTF in Arizona. :huh:

Anyway, back to the OP. Most of my finds are the easier traditionals, because it is in fact easier to run out and grab a few traditional caches if I happen to be in a particular area. I also prefer to seek out only single-stage caches if I'm in an unfamiliar area, so I can have all the right maps ready to go and I know where I'm headed.

With that said, however, I do prefer the more challenging caches. Last weekend, I spent an entire afternoon in pursuit of a 12-stage multi that required comparing 90-year-old photos and data of Los Angeles to the modern-day environment. It was a total brain-bender, and we screwed up the final coordinates twice, but the whole cache was a fantastic learning experience and the cache was overall a blast.

My own favorite cache hides are the ones that get the fewest visits. Sure, I don't get as many logs on my mystery cache hidden deep in an old talc mine as I do my 1/1 cache at the La Brea Tar Pits, but that makes the logs I *do* get on that cache much more worthwhile.

November 3, 2005

...And, apparently, two FTF's, which is odd because I've never scored an FTF in Arizona.

I'm Soooo Afraid

Chomper

Looks like it isn't smart enough to differentiate between a find log and the "beta find log".

Multiple Points For Multi And Hard Caches

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation