What makes a geocache hard to find?

October 20, 2007

Well? what really makes a good , HARD geocache, a real challenge? or next to impossible find

2k · October 20, 2007

For me most of the time it is the location. If there are 80 million possible hiding places I have problems. Most caches are placed where I can narrow the hiding places down to 4 or 5 and I don't really have any problems finding the cache.

11.3k · October 20, 2007

Welcome to the Forums!

Bad coordinates . . . :blink:

Seriously, although some people might enjoy those types of caches, I don't. :blink: I prefer getting to the location the cacher wanted me to see and finding the cache quickly, so I can enjoy the location and take pictures of the view, or whatever else is worthwhile at that presumably-good location.

For me, there is nothing more frustrating than a needle-in-a-haystack hide or a cleverly-cammoed cache in a muggle-full location. The worst of all is a difficult-to-find cache at the end of a long hike. I even placed a cache called "Hard Hike, Easy Find" to emphasize that is the way those caches should be placed.

2.5k · October 20, 2007

I agree with Miragee and Night Stalker...bad cords are obnoxious, needles in a haystack hides are monotonous. We did a lot of one cacher's hide a while back on our way to and from an event. The coords were consistly mushy (20-30 feet off). For most of their hides, the place it had to be was obvious, but they had one hide in a spot that had literally hundreds of places to put a cache. We looked in some of the more interesting possibilities and then gave up when it stopped being fun.

What was truely disappointing was that we had already decided to pass on doing any more of this person's hides on that trip because they just weren't much fun. But the locals all ooohed and ahhhhed over this one cache, saying how challenging it was, how clever it was, and noting it was worth the 5 or 6 times it took to find the cache~ so we stopped by to see what was worth all that praise.

We later learned how and where it was hidden, and it isn't a bit clever, it just requires pawing through a lot of the same things over and over until you get lucky--and you don't even get good coords to start from. A needle in a haystack hide isn't challenging, it just requires patience, a good methodology, and a lot of time.

A truely challenging cache has excellent coords, a cleverly worded description (one that might actually give away the hiding spot--but only after you have found it!), maybe a good hint, a neat cammo job--and is still tricky to find!

2.7k · October 20, 2007

To me hard to find caches aren't good. So I'll answer the next to impossible to find part of the question. That would be a well camouflaged cache so small that it impossible to remove the sliver of paper the owner jokingly calls a log without a pair of tiny tweezers and a high powered microscope. Now place the cache in a wooded area with poor coordinates because of heavy leaf cover, list it as a large sized cache and give a hint like "No hint needed" or "This may take a while to find" or "are you stupid or something" or all three.

I would prefer to find a cache that is challenge to get to but easy to find.

Edited October 20, 2007 by Glenn

14.3k · October 20, 2007

I agree. I hate caches with bad coords. I will ignore cachers who do this.

I enjoy difficult caches. The best ones are multis that have a variety of cammo at each stage. They can also use waypoint projection techniques. It is really fun solving a puzzle in the field. We had some caches that wrote stories that gave away clues to help find each stage of a long multi. Those a really fun!

October 20, 2007

I think a "good" hard geocache is all about the camouflage. Anyone can hide a cache inside something that has to be unscrewed, etc. to find. The clever ones, are the ones that are sitting right out in the open but are so well camo'd that you really have to search. Hard can be fun too. I would suggest though that if you plan on hiding something really small after a looooong hike, relay that the difficulty level is not just for the length of hike in the description. It doesn't make it any easier for the cacher to find your cache, and it keeps people who might be upset from hiking a long distance to find an easy cache from getting upset. Knowing what to expect, but still not giving anything away, is always helpful.

October 20, 2007

thick canopy overhead is always nice..multitudes of muggles..and i dont even bother with puzzle caches,,they make me feel like im back in school and all i want is to be out in the woods....

October 20, 2007

Bad cords are a big problem! I know one cacher who flat out told me that he just places the cache, holds the GPSr over it, and hits the mark button on his magellin 200 and uses those cords. I still go after his caches tho. I am just happy he is placing them. What I do not like is the people who just find. I myself think they are missing out on half of the fun!

I will have to say that I like a clever hide! If I have the time I will not give up till I find it! I think it is the chalange that keeps me looking! Now if I do not have time I will move on and not get mad about it! Yea getting sent to a great location is part of the game but there are more facets to this than location! Not every cacher has the same interest and therefore each will have his or her own hiding style! If you do not like my style then just move on and I will not worry about it because someone who does like it will come looking! I myself have hidden a variety of caches. In fact I plan on hidding everything from skirtlifters to a beautiful hike to a wonderful location. I do not find my town all that interesting but I know that if I place caches they will come. Mayfield, KY has a four lane running beside it that is slated to become part of the I-69 Corridor and I know that if I place plenty of caches people will be likely to stop by our town and check things out. On top of that I plan to draw interest to other area landmarks, historical places, and places that are just neat to visit!

If you place it, I will hunt for it if I come by!

October 21, 2007

I've got one, entitled "bog log" (GC15YJB), that fit the bill (IMHO). I'm disappointed that more folks don't try looking for it. In fact, I feel terrible that I may have imprisoned the TB because of the cammo (or perhaps it's just lack of interest in this particular TB).

Regarding the original question, the altitude on caches is what drive me crazy. My GPS'r doesn't like climbing hills, apparently. It said, earlier today, that I was 20' off when I was standing directly over it.

Edited October 21, 2007 by meralgia

1.8k · October 21, 2007

High rate of difficulty is probable if it's in Delaware, Ohio.

14k · October 21, 2007

The ones that give me the most difficulty are ones for which there are lots of potential hiding spots at the posted coordinates (for example, rock walls, nanos on a tank). Combine that with bad coordinates in an area with heavy tree cover, and it really drives me nuts.

October 21, 2007

I think a cleaverly camoflaged container...

one that is in plain sight, yet blends in naturally with the surroundings...

Color and container material are the key...

they can drive people nuts...

We have a couple of caches like that...

Right there, in plain sight when you get to GZ...

Yet it takes some "seasoned" cachers 2-? visits, or 30+ minutes of searching, to actually find...

Very satisfying for us (our job has been done), and to the finder when they actually "see" it...

Those are our caches that people rave about...

i.e. our JAWS III and Look at the Ducks caches...

Edited October 21, 2007 by Peconic Bay Sailors

19k · October 22, 2007

I don't think I understand your question, and I don't think most of the replies answer it. Seems most people are talking about what sort of difficult hide they prefer. But you're asking several questions... good, hard, a challenge, and next to impossible to find. Those may be mutually exclusive attributes.

That said, I do agree with those that said essentially that, if a cache is going to be hard to find, that its much more rewarding to find eventually that you've been looking right at it, possibly even touching it. That's far superior to discovering after an hour or more of searching to find that the coordinates are off, or that its in a different hollow tree than the dozens that you've already checked.

2.5k · October 22, 2007

It occurs to me that I didn't answer your question...Peconic Bay Sailors may have said it closest to what I think.

A really good cache is challenging to find even when you are standing just beside it, over it, under it. It makes you think outside the box. Usually it's camouflage that makes the difference, and anything that makes the cache seem to be a part of the surroundings is a plus. Sometimes it's that a clever mechanism has to be employed to get the cache, other times it's just a simple matter of needing to look much more closely at what is there--or what isn't there.

Some of the best ones I've seen "only work once"---for once you've seen them, if you find yourself in a similar spot again later, you know to look there, turn that, pull this, or push here. That's why I love to find caches while we travel--it let's me run across new ideas that I can bring back to my area for others to be inspired by.

1.1k · October 22, 2007

Heavy tree cover on a steep slope or a little valley to mess with your signal, a cache container hidden nearly flush with the ground with no unusual pile of sticks or rocks to give it away, and many other likely decoy spots nearby (fallen or hollow trees and rock piles) to plant some doubt in the searchers' minds.

(all that and bad coordinates with no hints :laughing: )

Edited October 22, 2007 by CacheNCarryMA

18.9k · October 22, 2007

For me - it is the location and the camo that fits it best. I won't stay very long in an area exposed to muggles or traffic or that is just not a fun spot. Bring me to some cool, scenic, little known, historic area and you can make it as hard as you want because I will take the time to look and spend more time on the hunt. I don't like little caches that could be easily replaced by a bigger one in these remote areas.

1.4k · October 22, 2007

Hey there seeker welcome to the forums! Just a little suggestion, you might get a closer to the information you are looking for if you would be a little more specific with your questions. This one has quite a few ways to approach. Or... were you trying to make answering it a challenge? :laughing: I'll give it a go because there's more than one good question in there.

After you have found a few caches, you'll find that there's a few "standard" ways that caches are hidden and these are duplicated in most cache hides. A magnetic cache under a bench, or stuck on a guardrail, or under a lampost skirt, covered by a pile of sticks or rocks... the list goes on. I'd say the first rule is to stay away from a hide like this if your intent is to challenge the seeker and muggle proof the cache.

Considering where people will begin searching first is helpful. What I mean by this is that it is human nature to start searching at ground level and go about as high as your chest. Conversely, it's not natural to look above eye level. It's also annoying to hide something that people cannot reach unless you warn them that they'll need a ladder. Providing something else that blends into the environment that can be used as a stepping device is a nice touch sometimes.

What usually gives a cache hide away is an imperfection of some sort. Paint that is not quite matched right, a replica of something that is not quite the right texture or shape. Often a hider is challenged by aging a cache container before they leave it in the field. We always study the area we want to hide in very carefully before we disturb anything. We want to comprehend what "natural" is. Sometimes, it is possible to find something that was already there and modify it into be a cache. Be respectful if you consider this technique.

As it has been mentioned, hiding in plain sight is a skill that is widely appreciated and can make a cache fun and challenging. A cacher is programmed to look for things that are not in plain sight and concealed. You can use this to your advantage with some practice. You can also look for the most obvious place to hide (these will be very apparent to you after you find enough caches) and put a decoy cache there. Please do not taunt the cacher, we find taking the opportunity to thank them for looking works well.

Invite people to come with you to seek your cache or cache in a group. The very best education on hiding is watching people looking for a cache and noting where they look first. Engage cachers in this conversation about what they look for first as it's a fun topic among seekers, you don't even need to tell them why you want to know.

If you are going to challenge the seeker, please consider the lowest common denominator and try to understand what a cacher will "potentially" do that might be harmful to the area if they do not find the cache right away. There's ways to either warn folks in the cache page or not locate your cache near these problem areas. Sometimes these things are not apparent until someone does them.

Lastly, be prepared to revisit your hide and understand how is it functioning and make adjustments. A good rule is after 3 finds and then as frequently as you can. Sometimes a good cache hide is really hard to reset as you intended it and you are going to need to provide a photo or detailed instructions. Remember if someone puts it back wrong, all the people from then on will see it that way. It's a harsh reality of the game that there are few people that are going to respect your hide the way you want them to.

October 22, 2007

What makes caches hard for me are bad assumptions.

When I see a cache description and it says "magnetic" as the hint, I assume the magnet will be attached to the large metal structure near GZ. One cacher in the area put the magnetic in an easy hiding spot in a concrete wall near a metal railing and I had to go back three times to find it.

Another time, I walked to ground zero and saw a raised garden filled with rocks with a tree in the middle. I searched the rocks for more than an hour before the owner sitting across the street yelled "UP" - the cache was camouflaged into the tree above me.

Ah well, we all know what Felix Unger used to say about assumptions...

January 7, 2008

No Kidding! I visited there earlier this year for a wedding, and there are some challenging caches there! I only found a few, and I think I DNF'd most of "his" finds that I looked at due to my limited time there.

January 8, 2008

Going with the original title of this thread, I can offer one suggestion of what makes a cache hard to find.

Change the lines we are so used to seeing, by reorienting them. If one is in the forest, one looks for vertical lines to differentiate natural from man made. This can lead to false security in your perception of what is out of place, and what is not.

This type of hide, as seen in the following pic has led many seasoned geocachers to post DNF's on a 1 difficulty hide. :rolleyes:

P.S. This one and five of Team Magic's other hides identical, are within 10 feet of the road!

5.7k · January 8, 2008

A really really good camo job.

You know, like a micro covered with a bunch of leaves hidden in a bunch of leaves. :rolleyes: :huh:

Or a well constructed cache container that looks like a part of the structure upon which it is hidden.

Edited January 8, 2008 by Team Cotati

January 8, 2008

I like clever caches that 'stare me in the face' but I look in all the typical hiding spots first. When I finally find the cache I feel a great sense of reward, and will tell my friends no more than "you have to try this cache".

I don't like hides that are intended to be time wasters and have little thought to them (i.e micros with a million possible spots). When I find these I tell my friends "it's in the 973rd hole from the right and it's a magnetic nano".

January 8, 2008

A great cache is well camoed! A worthless cache has bad coords! Enough of my opinion:)

24.7k · January 8, 2008

It varies. If I'm having a dumbass attack, it's going to be hard, at least for me.

One classic approach is the needle in the haystack. A boulder field is hard. Even with an ammo can. There are so many locations it could be. This can be overdone very easily.

Another approch and my personal favorite is the new twist. New camo, new container, new hiding spot in an old locaition. If someone finds a new twist that I haven't seen then it's going to be hard for me. The first lamp post micro was genius. I never knew those skirts lifted. Now I do and it's an easy hide. The first one though. Man was that hard.

Edited January 8, 2008 by Renegade Knight

1.4k · January 8, 2008

As for the caches I like to find, the hider is usually very aware of the differences between annoyingly difficult and creatively fun. There is nothing creative about a needle in the haystack hide, an LPC, or a pile of sticks. I'd concur with RK here. The best part of playing this game (for me) is finding a cache that gives me a challenge because it is a new twist. I am actually thrilled when I can't find something right away that is hidden in plain sight.

January 8, 2008

Thorns and briars.

What makes a geocache hard to find?

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

Join the conversation