are people getting sick of puzzle caches

1.7k · July 3, 2012

Clearing my map isn't important to me.

As I am a firm believer that a multi-cache should be multi-cache not solve a vert, find final, unfortunately some multi-caches end up ignored (= flagged in GSAK) because it is a field puzzle cache.

Kiss at least 30% goodbye.

I don't particularly like field puzzles that means some puzzles end up automatically ignored.

I also end up ignoring puzzles that require one to become a near expert especially in a field I find boring.

(to use hyperbole)I don't want to solve a cypher that was ROT13nd, converted to hexadecimal, base 64, decimal, and then Unicode in decimal minus the pounds, ampersands and semicolons, without a key. With a key is only slightly more tolerable. A.K.A. NOT FUN for me.

Kiss about 75% goodbye.

As of last night there are 2225 puzzles in Michigan. That leaves about 256 I'll consider (not considering challenge)

14 are large.

498 are regular.

754 are small. (I'll automatically assume 50% are actually micro)

691 are micro.

267 are other/not chosen. I'd be willing to bet that less than 10% are bigger than micro.

It is safe to assume I won't bother with another 60%. Now we are down to 102 or 1.2 caches per county. I might have 10 in range.

Even though the math says I should just completely ignore all puzzles I don't bother filtering till GSAK and I don't delete. I no matter how doubtful, I might try out a particular puzzle one day.

2k · July 3, 2012

Even though this topic was in 2009...if I ignored that and looked at the question right now, I would agree that the puzzle interest has waned in my area. There are less folks going after FTFs on the new puzzles and less # of folks you know would eventually solve the puzzle. Also, seems to be less blood to try and solve them. Folks like puzzles that you can tell how to proceed. As much as a Sudoku or KenKen or the like puzzle may seem boring, they will get hit more than something where you need a brain spark to proceed.

Just be prepared for less finders on it. I have recently tried an experimentation with a spoiler puzzle but so far, results do not seem to indicate folks have noticed its got spoilers all over the logs to make the puzzle easier to solve.

8.9k · July 3, 2012

Of the caches placed within 25 miles of my home, there hasn't been a calendar quarter since January 2008 that Traditionals haven't made up at least 86% of the placed caches. Since April of 2010, traditionals have always made up over 90% of the caches placed within 25 miles of my home. I'm not seeing a significant increase in the rate of traditionals compared to others.

But as other posters have said: When this hobby opened up to a far wider-reaching participant base, the need for gratification became more pervasive. I point to the numerous threads where people complained that they couldn't get a smiley for each stage of a mutli-cache. I will also point to the anecdotal stories I have seen and heard where cachers go out to find a cache that's a great hike into the back wilderness, and when they return to the parking lot, they place a cache there. If people have a choice between hiking 3 miles for a smiley or driving up to a parking lot to get a smiley, most will choose the latter. Some even suggested having smiley's be "weighted" for difficulty of a hike or puzzle - that something like The Journal should get more "smiley points" than a parking lot at a Walmart.

So - place the caches you like to find. Focus on the caches that bring you enjoyment. Otherwise, you're doing it wrong.

I recently read a post by a cacher that said they have a whole bunch of favorite points to give out, and that they didn't feel that any of the caches they have found were worthy of favorite points. IMHO, they need to be more choosey about the caches they seek. If they can't go to one cache out of the last 100 and say "I really enjoyed that," then why are they doing it?

2.6k · July 3, 2012

Puzzles are my least favorite cache.....no surprise as I've never cared for puzzles of any kind.

What I love about the hobby is exploring outdoors and most puzzles require more computer/indoor time.

July 3, 2012

I like multicaches , hard to reach caches and some puzzles, but I don't like the puzzles that take me hours to figure out or only have a photo and no explanation.

I also don't like the puzzles that seam to require some insiders knowledge. These seam to be placed for specific friends to find and not the general public.

I have never had the attention span to spend a long period of time on a puzzle. I have asked my wife to help on some and if it is taking her too long (or so I think) I tell her to give up and we will go find another cache.

1.4k · July 3, 2012

Every time someone asks why a particular type of cache is not as popular, several posters will drag out the tired old line,"It's all about the smileys".

Come on people, do you really think everyone will like,(or can even do,) the same things you like?

I don't care for puzzles. When I see one I might scan the cache page to see if I might want to do it. Most of the time, I just skip them, and heres a surprise, it has nothing at all to do with the smiley!

At my age and with my health, I would be more likely to just grab the cache at the trailhead and not even be able to hike into the (hopefully) much nicer one a couple miles up the trail. Nothing at all to do with the smiley.

I don't do a lot of puzzles multis,or Earthcaches because I really don't care for them, has nothing to do with the smiley.

People come on the forum to find answers to why a type of cache is not as popular. Hopefully to try to improve their hide of that type of cache. Telling someone, Oh it's all about the smiley doesn't help one bit. How about pulling your heads out of the sand and trying to give some advice, rather than excuses.

I know that for a larger number of people it may be the smiley that keeps them away from the type of cache you like. However, I will bet for a great many, if not most, who avoid a type of cache it is because they don't care for that particular type.

I don't like power trails, and I don't do them, I guess that must be because of the smiley. :blink: :blink: :blink:

2.3k · July 3, 2012

I'll do some puzzles. If it doesn't require highly specialized knowledge I may look at it. Things with a picture and no explanation I won't do.

I have the same issue with puzzles that I have with multis and generally avoid them though. If you get an unmaintained puzzle especially with a field aspect to solving it it ceases immediately to be fun for me. Last summer I figured out how to do a puzzle. Did the puzzle (which involved some field work) only to find out my coordinates weren't right. Reason being? The cache owner did not take into account nor did he adjust yearly for the flags on the poles changing places or vanishing altogether. He could have (if he wanted) easily changed his cache page so the puzzle was actually solvable with the info on site but he didn't. So I ended up having to brute force the coordinates because I was so sure I would end up some place cool when it was all done. After all why would one go through all that trouble and not bring you somewhere cool? Wrong again. Right off a parking lot.

So yeah I don't very often do puzzles unless I know the cache owner maintains their stuff. I really don't like putting in all that work to end up finding a micro with a soggy log somewhere either so I tend to avoid micro puzzles.

Nothing to do with the smiley. I just wnat to have an enjoyable time caching and puzzles don't often add to the enjoyment for me.

1.1k · July 3, 2012

for me:

geocaching is a way to get out, get fresh air and see stuff and see new areas, and play hide and seek..

for me puzzles are a way to PREVENT or DELAY me from going outside, it feel like more waste of time behind a PC.

in my area there are way too many puzzles and they clearly took alot of time to create,

and they are not really found that much, so it is not something most people find fun to do,

compared to alot traditionals in the same area with 10-20 times as many finds.

a good cache is not rated by how many finds it gets, ok but all your work will maybe only make a handfull of people happy,

why not spend some time making a few traditionals insted, and please make them a little bit over avarage in quality

and over 2-3 in D/T rating, so it is more fun to find them.

July 3, 2012

I like puzzles that I can solve. It's something to do when I can't get out and look for caches that's still caching-related. Of course, the ones I can solve aren't that difficult...

8.9k · July 3, 2012

I don't like power trails, and I don't do them, I guess that must be because of the smiley. :blink:

That actually kinda proves the point by pointing out your differences. You don't care about the smiley ∴ you are not likely to do power trails. :bad:

10.1k · July 3, 2012

Puzzle caches get less finds because fewer people are interested in solving/finding the. It's a niche category. Some people love them! Most ignore them. Of course, that's also true of multis.

Myself, I will work long and hard on difficult puzzle caches in certain areas. My Ten-Mile list. There's an evil relative of Bullwinkle nearby. Tough, but satisfying when solved. Still working on a number of them... The other area is my caching companion's Ten-Mile List, which includes most of New York City. There we have the Central Park Gates caches. Quite evil! But again, satisfying to solve.

My evil mystery caches are in the same two areas (for the most part). Mine tend to be more obtuse, and don't get a lot of finds. (Which is okay with me. They are meant to be challenging.) Generally, those who do solve them enjoy having solved them.

As to other areas, I will look at the mystery caches, and if they aren't too frustrating or obtuse, I will work on them. I've found mystery caches in Wisconsin, Georgia, Ohio and Maine. But vacation trips are usually for fairly easy caches. I've solved four or five in Maritime Canada, in preparation for the next trip. Hopefully, we will get to find a few of them.

1.4k · July 3, 2012

I don't like power trails, and I don't do them, I guess that must be because of the smiley. :blink:

That actually kinda proves the point by pointing out your differences. You don't care about the smiley ∴ you are not likely to do power trails.

Do you really think most people who do not like puzzles, feel that way because of smileys? Come on, there are just a lot of people who do not like to do puzzles, and has nothing to do with smileys.

I realize there are some people who won't do them because of the smiley, but I would bet the farm most who don't do them just don't like puzzles.

7.9k · July 3, 2012

Actually, puzzles and powertrails would seem to be diametrically opposed as far as the smilie count vs. time spent is concerned.

6.8k · July 4, 2012

in my area there are way too many puzzles and they clearly took alot of time to create,

and they are not really found that much, so it is not something most people find fun to do,

compared to alot traditionals in the same area with 10-20 times as many finds.

a good cache is not rated by how many finds it gets, ok but all your work will maybe only make a handfull of people happy,

why not spend some time making a few traditionals insted, and please make them a little bit over avarage in quality

and over 2-3 in D/T rating, so it is more fun to find them.

Actually, 10-20 times as many visits might be way too much for many locations.

As I cannot hide and maintain caches with difficult terrain ratings, including more difficult tasks is my

only approach to limiting the number of visitors. If a cache is found around 10 to at most 20 times per

year, this is fine for me. I get unhappy with considerably more visits.

Moreover, I rather make few happy by offering something special to them, but making many moderately happy by

offering something average to them. In order to hide highly appraised traditionals in my area one needs

to come up with a creative hideout or container (something I neither appreciate as finder nor as hider) or hide the cache at

a breathtaking and very adventurous location (nothing within reach for me).

Cezanne

1.4k · July 4, 2012

Actually, puzzles and powertrails would seem to be diametrically opposed as far as the smilie count vs. time spent is concerned.

I guess I need to explain that I was being sarcastic when I used the example of the power trails.

I was trying to point out how silly it is to assume if someone doesn't like a type of cache it is because of the smileys. I think it is painfully obvious if you don't like power trails it has nothing to do with lack of smileys. However, it seems everytime someone brings up a cache type, everyone assumes those that don't like them, feel that way because of the smileys.

14k · July 4, 2012

I don't like power trails, and I don't do them, I guess that must be because of the smiley. :blink:

That actually kinda proves the point by pointing out your differences. You don't care about the smiley ∴ you are not likely to do power trails.

Do you really think most people who do not like puzzles, feel that way because of smileys? Come on, there are just a lot of people who do not like to do puzzles, and has nothing to do with smileys.

I realize there are some people who won't do them because of the smiley, but I would bet the farm most who don't do them just don't like puzzles.

I guess I can't figure out what you mean when you write "because of the smiley" because it doesn't make sense in either of the above sentences.

If someone doesn't find a certain cache type they don't get credit for the find, thus don't "get a smiley".

15.3k · July 4, 2012

why not spend some time making a few traditionals insted, and please make them a little bit over avarage in quality and over 2-3 in D/T rating, so it is more fun to find them.

I created my puzzle cache because I wanted to create it as a puzzle cache. I didn't want to create a traditional cache instead. I didn't want to create a few traditional caches instead. I hide the caches that I want to own and maintain. I do not hide caches to please people whose preferences differ significantly from my own.

And yes, as cezanne indicated, sometimes a cache receiving more visits would not be appropriate for the area. I've found puzzle caches that were hidden as puzzle caches specifically because the owner wanted to reduce the number of visits the cache location received. I've also seen busy parks where various owners hid an assortment of short-lived caches, until someone hid a puzzle cache, and that's what survived (whether or not that was the intent of the owner).

But then, about half my Favorites are mystery/puzzle caches, so I'm hardly in the "getting sick of puzzle caches" crowd.

July 4, 2012

I've never had exposure to puzzles and just don't even know how to do most of them- don't even know where to start. I'm probably not the only one.

3.7k · July 4, 2012

Not getting sick of puzzle caches here. I have no choice, actually, I have to do them, because I like hiding caches.

However, some of them I definately enjoy. The ones I like are challenging and unique, but contain all or most of the info you need on the cache page. There was 1 puzzle I did which involved a week of computer programming-that was probably my all-time favorite puzzle. Another one I did recently had the coordiantes hidden in bar codes. That was probably my 2nd favorite.

Puzzles I dislike:

1) Puzzles that involve Googling 100 different types of sheep-those are the ones make me want to vomit.

2) Puzzles that are only easy-if-you-know-how i.e. 90% of the people who solved it used PAF.

Edited July 4, 2012 by The_Incredibles_

1.4k · July 4, 2012

I don't like power trails, and I don't do them, I guess that must be because of the smiley. :blink:

That actually kinda proves the point by pointing out your differences. You don't care about the smiley ∴ you are not likely to do power trails.

Do you really think most people who do not like puzzles, feel that way because of smileys? Come on, there are just a lot of people who do not like to do puzzles, and has nothing to do with smileys.

I realize there are some people who won't do them because of the smiley, but I would bet the farm most who don't do them just don't like puzzles.

I guess I can't figure out what you mean when you write "because of the smiley" because it doesn't make sense in either of the above sentences.

If someone doesn't find a certain cache type they don't get credit for the find, thus don't "get a smiley".

The thought is, the harder you have to work for the smiley the less likely someone into numbers will look for that type of cache. While the theory is solid, there are many other reason people do not like a type of cache. It feels a little insulting for someone to assume if you don't like a cache you must be into the numbers.

6.1k · July 4, 2012

Puzzle caches are much more fun to create than to solve. IMO

I actually created a difficult one that held off the FTF freaks for at least a month, but there has been only a couple of finds since. If it gets very few visits, it really doesn't bother me, as some people really enjoy finding a cache which hasn't been found in a long time and is in good shape, as it's sort of a time capsule. An ammo can hidden well could last for years before it rusts away. Then there is the inner lock n lock holding the logbook..

2.6k · July 4, 2012

We do this for fun – so people will do what they enjoy (and are capable of doing). And we all have limited time so we make choices as to what we look for. It’s not surprising to me that the caches with the most finds statistically tend to be traditionals.

Yes “the numbers” mean more to some people than others. Few will call themselves “numbers cachers” and I am no exception. But I do get a little excitement each time I find a cache. So I can understand that if someone has a few hours to cache, they may choose to find several caches rather than one difficult one.

Having said that – I do like puzzle caches. I tend to work on the puzzle aspect during times when I have free time but the time isn’t suitable for me to be finding caches (bad weather, night time, need to be at home etc). There are many I can’t do, but there are also lots that I can do.

The only issue I have with puzzle caches is not knowing where the cache is. Now that may sound obvious.. but what I mean is this. I like finding caches which involve a good walk in the countryside. With traditionals, I can see where the cache is on the map, and what the terrain is like, what footpaths there are, etc. With a puzzle, generally I don’t know until I’ve solved it. Some owners will give an idea in the cache description, but I find many do not. The terrain rating and previous logs can also give some hints. But still – there are some puzzles which I spent many hours to solve, only to find the cache itself was on a busy road and not a place I would enjoy visiting.

With the only puzzle caches I own I do tell you how long of a walk to expect and what the walk is like; and I appreciate puzzle caches which do this.

This weekend I’m planning to do Megalithic 4, which I know from a friend's recommendation (as well as the favourite points and the logs) will be rewarding – not only the puzzle aspect but the walks to the various stages and what I will see there. It will take most of the weekend I expect.

1.1k · July 4, 2012

I am happy so many DIFFERENT people makes caches

they do it their way, some I like to find or solve more than others,

I found it is actually possible to solve all the puzzles you like,

if you really want to, you just need to start with easy ones and work your way up the diff scale,

some I spend very long time on, and some I wasted alot of time on.

wasted time = on a puzzle that is just made to kill time, not to teach me stuff (those i really hate)

spend time = on a puzzle with insight, technical information, skils to learn, just well made.

it is ok to spend time, but not to waste time.

I also do a little math of what is fun to do in my spare time,

one hr spend behind a PC to solve a puzzle = 100km drive distance

this mean I can goto new areas with ALOT more great caches, compared to that just ONE solved puzzle

maybe it ends up with just a filmcanister thrown on the ground...

hum, what is most fun ? driving vs solve puzzles ?

when I drive my car I dont see it as wasted transport time,

I look at all the things I pass and enjoy the trip,

when I work on some puzzles it feels like just more time at work.

6.8k · July 4, 2012

I found it is actually possible to solve all the puzzles you like,

if you really want to, you just need to start with easy ones and work your way up the diff scale,

That is not true for me. There are many cache puzzles I cannot solve and many others I do not want to solve, but

there are also cache puzzles that I enjoy to solve.

hum, what is most fun ? driving vs solve puzzles ?

Definitely nearly anything else is more fun for me than driving. People are different.

I enjoy the walk to a cache and neither the drive to it nor the actual search for the container. I hate the hide and seek aspect.

Cezanne

2.6k · July 4, 2012

I don't care for most puzzle caches that require complicated numerical conversions because I suck at math and I just don't have the patience to slog through it. I also don't care for the ones where you are provided with very little information and have to more or less guess what the hider is thinking.

The ones that have to be solved with information found in the field I also don't care for because now I have to sit down and work through the puzzle when I could be moving on to the next cache. I know this sounds like I'm all about the smiley, but not really....like I said, I don't like math, so if I have to stop caching to spend some time crunching numbers I'm not having fun . If its a fairly simple case of filling in the blanks with some numbers found in the field to get the coordinates, I might do it....if it involves doing complex conversions and cyphers in the field, not so much.

Furthermore, since I usually have to travel some distance to find new caching areas, it's usually unlikely that I'll return to that area anytime soon, so gathering the data in the field, bringing it back home to work out the puzzle, then returning back to that area with the proper coordinates probably isn't going to happen.

Now, I don't mind a puzzle cache where most of the info is available on the cache page and I can obtain the final coordinates before I go out....even if it takes a good bit of decoding, Google research, and some time, I don't mind playing around with it when I have some free time then saving the coordinates for when I actually have a day to go caching. I actually have several of this type already solved, just waiting for the opportunity to get to that area to go find them.

4.1k · July 4, 2012

I knew my puzzle career was going to be limited when one CO suggested that their cache would be easy if I expanded my repertoire to include trigonometry.

So puzzles that require higher math; computer programming skills; counting minute details using a particular graphics program; leaps of disconnected "logic;" or an enigma code machine all go to my ignore list. If I am ever in the mood I know where to find them.

There are other puzzles that involve straightforward logic or simply require a lot of work on google. If I find myself with time on my hands and there is something other than the puzzle that makes me want to do it, I might eventually get around to it. I often ask myself if the puzzle is going to take more time than I would spend looking for a cache.

For the most part puzzles feel like work and there are other things I want to do with my life. So I exclude puzzles from my pq and notifications. I don't do puzzles for the sake of doing a puzzle. I can see no need to do a repetitive trail just because there are 50 puzzle caches in a row and the answers are easily found on the web. It reminds me of filing, house painting, or other make work tasks. Sometimes those things are necessary but they are not something I do for fun.

But I suppose some people must like that kind of thing.

1.3k · July 4, 2012

I do not like puzzles that have multiple possible solutions that lead to viable coordinates, and no geochecker, like this one: GC1ANQH - 407ETR at Bayview

I do like puzzle caches where working through to the solution allows me to learn; solving this one has made it possible for me to explain and demonstrate to other people the functionality of something we use every day, like this one: GCMZ07 - Thanks to Ron, Adi and Leonard

I do like puzzle caches that allow me to leverage my prior experience with, and increase my familiarity of, a particular area, like this one: GC243ZG - Rouge from Above

7.5k · July 4, 2012

This is still my favourite puzzle Look down, Look around, Look up . Found it back in 2009. At first I was confused but looking closely at the maps I noticed something. Plus the final was located where you could watch planes taking off and the container was swag-size. It had it all - fun puzzle, no math, interesting location, swag-size container and a geochecker.

8.9k · July 5, 2012

The thought is, the harder you have to work for the smiley the less likely someone into numbers will look for that type of cache. While the theory is solid, there are many other reason people do not like a type of cache.

I agree with you. But we shouldn't discount the fact that the competition for a higher increase in the find count does play SOME part in the perceived decrease in proportional frequency of placed puzzles caches and multi-caches.

Let's look at hyperbolic theoretical situation: Beautiful park, nice, terrain, great spots for hiding caches. Cacher places a well-thought-out, 5-stage multi-cache, all stages about 600 feet apart. In an identical park, another cacher places five separate well-thought-out traditional caches. All other things being equal, the prevailing attitude that I've heard and seen FOR MOST CACHERS is "Why go through the long hunt for one smiley, when I can put out the same effort and get five?"

It feels a little insulting for someone to assume if you don't like a cache you must be into the numbers.

Of course, that wasn't my intention. To your point, there may be MANY reasons why people aren't hunting for and/or placing puzzles. I still believe that one of the major factors (but not the only factor) is the drive toward higher find counts.

8.3k · July 6, 2012

Let's look at hyperbolic theoretical situation: Beautiful park, nice, terrain, great spots for hiding caches. Cacher places a well-thought-out, 5-stage multi-cache, all stages about 600 feet apart. In an identical park, another cacher places five separate well-thought-out traditional caches. All other things being equal, the prevailing attitude that I've heard and seen FOR MOST CACHERS is "Why go through the long hunt for one smiley, when I can put out the same effort and get five?"

Let me give you another perspective. I'm on a road trip and one of the objectives it getting Delorme squares and counties I don't already have. Should I spend 40-50 minutes on this 5 stage multi that has not been found for the last four months or should I go and get a couple of the traditionals that are being found on a regular basis? I'll go for the traditionals because we both know folks don't like logging DNF's and stage 4 on the multi has been missing for the last three months. This points out something, travelers are not likely to spend the time on a big multi. I'll go for a two stage, especially if the description says the final is nearby. Or I am going on a 100 mile round trip caching day. Again I don't want to spend the time looking for something I might not find. If I lived nearby, no problem I would be happy to get it. I did two 16 stage multis on a tree farm, so yes I do big multis.

7.5k · July 6, 2012

travelers are not likely to spend the time on a big multi.

When travelling I set my PQ for traditionals. If multis were sorted by length (maybe a 2-stage easy multi attribute), I might be inclined to do short 2-stage multis while travelling.

2.6k · July 6, 2012

I also take a different approach caching whilst traveling. If I am traveling with the family (who like caching but not as much as me) I need to limit the time/effort spent (while trying to find good quality caches). If traveling on business I also have limited time.

But I will still look at the puzzles in the area. I'll try and solve some before I go. This gets harder when the cache page is not in English, but I try.

I'm less likely to do a multi - especially in a foreign language. When I have tried (using an auto-translation) I generally find myself stuck at some stage due to not having the correct understanding.

2.6k · July 6, 2012

Let's look at hyperbolic theoretical situation: Beautiful park, nice, terrain, great spots for hiding caches. Cacher places a well-thought-out, 5-stage multi-cache, all stages about 600 feet apart. In an identical park, another cacher places five separate well-thought-out traditional caches. All other things being equal, the prevailing attitude that I've heard and seen FOR MOST CACHERS is "Why go through the long hunt for one smiley, when I can put out the same effort and get five?"

I'm sure that is true. But for puzzle caches - around my way there are some with multiple stages and field puzzles (and these are often the best!), but I'd say 80% or more are of the variety where you solve the puzzle in advance and get the final coordinates for a single stage. So the issue is more about can I solve the puzzle or not.

What is true for many (including myself) is being drawn to clusters of caches on the map. "Hey, that looks like a nice area with a variety of caches". So yes, the fact that there are several caches in an area attracts me. I'm more likely to notice that park with 5 caches than if it had 1. If that cluster includes puzzles and multis I won't exclude them - in fact I'll try and solve the puzzles. I'm less likely to travel to look for a single isolated cache with no others around (regardless of type). If it is in my local area I will, or if it is recommended by a friend etc. (In fact I'm planning to find a multi-stage puzzle this weekend which will take at least a full day). So to some extent I am influenced by the numbers, as I suspect many are. But again, not exclusively.

1.1k · July 6, 2012

>When travelling I set my PQ for traditionals

YES !!! I do exactly this..

and also rememebr to filter out those with NM

and those with last two logs DNF

then less chance you waste your time

1.1k · July 6, 2012

this one

http://coord.info/GC13F4Q

I solved 7600 km away from it, it looked very nice, well defined, good explained

no hidden tricks, funny research to do, and even a checker

6.8k · July 6, 2012

and also rememebr to filter out those with NM

and those with last two logs DNF

then less chance you waste your time

I rather would enjoy to visit a nice location I would not have found without geocaching and fail in finding the cache hidden there than ending up at a boring location and find a cache there (however creative the container might be). The latter I regard as waste of my time in particular abroad where I typically want to visit special locations.

To summarize, I guess waste of time is quite a subjective notion.

Cezanne

Edited July 6, 2012 by cezanne

14k · July 6, 2012

I also take a different approach caching whilst traveling. If I am traveling with the family (who like caching but not as much as me) I need to limit the time/effort spent (while trying to find good quality caches). If traveling on business I also have limited time.

But I will still look at the puzzles in the area. I'll try and solve some before I go. This gets harder when the cache page is not in English, but I try.

I'm less likely to do a multi - especially in a foreign language. When I have tried (using an auto-translation) I generally find myself stuck at some stage due to not having the correct understanding.

This pretty much mimics how I cache while traveling. My first PQ includes traditionals, virtuals, and letterbox caches. Then I'll do a PQ that just includes mystery caches and earth caches. I'll review the listings and save any of the earth caches that look interesting in a book mark. I'll also look at some of the mystery caches to see which ones might be solved before I leave and add them to a bookmark is well. I'll create a PQ from that bookmark and merge it with the traditionals/virtuals PQ in GSAK and send the caches to my GPS. I'll also save the PQs in the geocaching app on my iPhone if I'm going to be traveling someplace where I'll encounter data roaming charges.

My first priority while travel caching, if it it's a state or country I have not yet visited is to find at least once cache. After that I may go after a cache or two which allows me to explore a bit more. I also often have very little time while traveling on business and it's often to places where I might not have good local transportation and very few caches to be found. I often have the schedule in time for caching into my travel itinerary, which often involves paying for an extra night at a hotel.

14k · July 6, 2012

dup...

Edited July 6, 2012 by NYPaddleCacher

15.3k · July 6, 2012

When I'm going to be traveling, I start with a PQ of everything but mystery/puzzle caches. If there's an event scheduled in the area while I'm there, then I try to attend if possible. Then I look at the nearby mystery/puzzle caches. Any that I solve (or that don't need solving) go on my "solved unfound puzzles" list, and I download a second PQ from that list.

On my most recent trip, I attended an event one afternoon and spent another afternoon on a mystery/puzzle cache that ended up being one of my Favorites. I'm glad I didn't miss those by looking only at traditional caches.

2.2k · July 6, 2012

I know I do fewer and fewer puzzles now than I used to.

For me it's because people have started playing the "one up" game with puzzles. It seems puzzles used to be just a simple little twist on a cipher or word play or something but now it's become "how complex can I make it?"

Like power trails, Geocachers love to "take it to the next level" but it's a level I don't want to participate in.

1.1k · July 6, 2012

a puzzle is not always a puzzle,

they can also be a new seperate logable stage of a multi series

with physical demands all the way, no stuff to solve behind a PC

(exactly the best way to do a puzzle if you ask me)

each stage give you cords to the next one, and each stage is a real cache with a log book,

they are very demanding and give you offcourse a smilely for each logbook you find and sign.

today I compleeted this one

http://coord.info/GC3PCCJ

sorry text is in Danish, but you get my point.. it is a VERY hard one

we where there last night and gave up..

today I found it with another friend, but this time we bring more tools :-)

now I got them all 5 in this series, feels nice..

Edited July 6, 2012 by OZ2CPU

July 6, 2012

I like puzzles in general, but I hate the puzzle caches in my area. You shouldn't have to be a CIA codebreaker (I live near DC so...) to figure it out. I see pictures with little or no description (like it's obvious), references to obscure math, astronomy and music. I also see alot of one-upsmanship and secret inside riddles or information. Caches shouldn't be exclusive to a group of longtime cachers that know history newer folks can't reference. In fact most of the puzzle caches in my area are found by phoning an in-the-know friend or contacting the cache owner. If it's that hard, something's wrong. What satisfaction is there in giving up and asking someone?

3.6k · July 7, 2012

I rather create then solve. I can solve the ones like the Google or Wiki ones. I did solve a few that even some puzzle solvers had difficult with. The area near me that has the difficult puzzles are in Livermore. Sorry Fizzy but your area does have some of the most difficult puzzles. Including the Venona territory. I call some of these puzzlers the Livermore Lab Rats.

Edited July 7, 2012 by jellis

6.8k · July 7, 2012

I like puzzles in general, but I hate the puzzle caches in my area. You shouldn't have to be a CIA codebreaker (I live near DC so...) to figure it out. I see pictures with little or no description (like it's obvious), references to obscure math, astronomy and music.

I guess it depends a lot on one's background. For some already basic trigonometry is a big challenge, for others this belongs to the tools they can even apply at 3 o'clock in the morning without any effort.

Cachers come from very different areas and have very different capabilities and preferences.

For example, I cannot climb up a tree and have never done so, not even as a child.

Sometimes I can solve puzzles that take others days in a few seconds due to my background.

Not everyone prefers tree climbing and similar actions e.g. to doing math.

Personally, I like puzzles that need the right idea, but do not involve much manual work once one has obtained the idea.

Translating some ciphers where the routine work is the main job is very boring for me. I prefer puzzles where one does not know what to do right away, but which do not involve boring routine work to those where it is obvious what to do, but needs to engage in routine work that is hard to being automized.

In fact most of the puzzle caches in my area are found by phoning an in-the-know friend or contacting the cache owner. If it's that hard, something's wrong. What satisfaction is there in giving up and asking someone?

No, not necessarily. Those calling a friend might just be the wrong audience for those puzzles.

For example, if more complex cryptographic approaches are involved where it does not help just to use some applet in the internet without understanding what is going one, the cache is not suited for people with no background in that area

Cezanne

2.6k · July 7, 2012

a puzzle is not always a puzzle,

they can also be a new seperate logable stage of a multi series

with physical demands all the way, no stuff to solve behind a PC

(exactly the best way to do a puzzle if you ask me)

each stage give you cords to the next one, and each stage is a real cache with a log book,

they are very demanding and give you offcourse a smilely for each logbook you find and sign.

Yes I've seen some like that, though not many. But what is popular here is many cache series have information in some/all of the caches, then a "bonus" cache at the end which you can find if you have picked up the clues from the other caches. These caches tend to be as popular as the other caches in the series - virtually everyone doing the series will also try for the bonus - unless they were unable to find some of the caches and are missing vital information.

13.7k · July 7, 2012

I'm not sick of puzzles, but I'm getting more selective after finding weeks of solving a couple lead to LPC hides. Other, traditional hides by these COs were in the woods. What's the rationale?

6.8k · July 7, 2012

I'm not sick of puzzles, but I'm getting more selective after finding weeks of solving a couple lead to LPC hides. Other, traditional hides by these COs were in the woods. What's the rationale?

Personally, I prefer puzzle caches that lead to nice places, but there are quite some cachers who think that puzzle caches should not be hidden at nice places in order not to block nice places for traditionals and multi caches.

They mainly regard the final as a way to claim the solution of the puzzle on gc.com and getting credit for it.

Cezanne

July 7, 2012

...there are quite some cachers who think that puzzle caches should not be hidden at nice places in order not to block nice places for traditionals and multi caches.

They mainly regard the final as a way to claim the solution of the puzzle on gc.com and getting credit for it.

That's generally the way it's done around here. It doesn't make sense to take up a lot of space in a park for a puzzle that will only be found a few times a year.

7.5k · July 7, 2012

a puzzle is not always a puzzle,

they can also be a new seperate logable stage of a multi series

with physical demands all the way, no stuff to solve behind a PC

(exactly the best way to do a puzzle if you ask me)

each stage give you cords to the next one, and each stage is a real cache with a log book,

they are very demanding and give you offcourse a smilely for each logbook you find and sign.

Yes I've seen some like that, though not many. But what is popular here is many cache series have information in some/all of the caches, then a "bonus" cache at the end which you can find if you have picked up the clues from the other caches. These caches tend to be as popular as the other caches in the series - virtually everyone doing the series will also try for the bonus - unless they were unable to find some of the caches and are missing vital information.

Not me. I keep forgetting to get the clue from under the lid. I don't think I've ever got a bonus cache.

11.6k · July 7, 2012

is it just my area or are people getting sick of puzzle caches.

I've often skipped Unknown/Puzzle and Multis, but only because I'm visiting a certain area -- the Final may be miles away. If I solve a couple of puzzles on-the-fly, one is out of the way in one direction, the other's far in the opposite direction. It may be a long time til I get a chance to visit the spot where the coords are. Many times I can't even tell which puzzle would lead to the place I intend to visit. I'm now having to drive farther for caches to hunt, and additional distance driving when I arrive is not a good option.

And I placed one of my caches as an Unknown, specifically to cause fewer visits. There's no geotrail, it's easy to maintain, and the quality stays good. That's in a park where all the other caches get rather muggled. It's a super-easy puzzle, but it's avoided due to being a puzzle.

Edited July 7, 2012 by kunarion

are people getting sick of puzzle 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

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment