Did I make this puzzle too hard?

[+ar_kayaker]

I created this cache recently and even though I know at least three local cachers have been working on it (beacuse they have e-mailed asking for hints) It has sat for two nice sunny weekends with no finds. The norm for any any cache to go unfound in this area is no more than a week, even with the puzzle caches.

 

Did I make it too hard?

 

AK

[+9Key]

I don't find puzzles like that to be very much fun, but since you posted looking for a pat on the back...you did rate it a 4.5 so I would think it'll take a little while to be found.

[+Harry Dolphin]

There's nothing wrong with putting out a difficult puzzle. You shouldn't expect many finds quickly. Then PAF goes into effect, and you'll start getting finds from many people who have no idea what a puzzle is.

[+Sioneva]

Wish I lived closer - this looks like a puzzle I'd love to solve! Maybe I will anyway...

 

I think I recognize a reader of The Code Book...

[+ecanderson]

Don't know if I'd say the puzzle was too hard, but you could have -ahem- at least been a sport and properly attributed all of that text on the Beale Cipher in your description to Simon Singh book from whence it came (http://www.simonsingh.net/The_Code_Book.html).

[+ar_kayaker]

I don't find puzzles like that to be very much fun, but since you posted looking for a pat on the back...you did rate it a 4.5 so I would think it'll take a little while to be found.

 

Actually no, I'm not looking for a pat on the back. It's not actually the length of time that bothers me, I've got a couple of terrain 4+ caches that have been around for a couple of years with only a few finds, especially after the FTF. It was, and is, a question of whether or not I'd gone overkill on the puzzle.

 

We have a fairly competiative group of FTF'rs in the area so the time to FTF seemed odd and since this is the first hard puzzle I've put out I've never had an issue with people e-mailing for hints before so I didn't know if that was normal.

 

AK

[+kunarion]

There's nothing wrong with putting out a difficult puzzle. You shouldn't expect many finds quickly. Then PAF goes into effect, and you'll start getting finds from many people who have no idea what a puzzle is.

I agree. Your "difficulty" is set, and unlike the Beale Cipher, your code translates to actual text. People who love tough codes will eat this up!

 

And you're doing it right, giving out a little additional info as you see fit. If the "additional hint" is a very specific hint, I'd suggest letting people try to solve it as it is. Some people might be busy counting thousands of words as we speak. Consider giving them a chance, and don't give in to people asking for hints already. Your call. All I'm saying is, I think it's fine the way it is, and a super cool idea.

 

But I'd never figure it out.

Edited September 29, 2009 by kunarion

[+Harry Dolphin]

We have a fairly competiative group of FTF'rs in the area so the time to FTF seemed odd and since this is the first hard puzzle I've put out I've never had an issue with people e-mailing for hints before so I didn't know if that was normal.

 

Many people seem to think that they are entitled to extra hints. Generally, I ignore them until there have been a number of people who have figured out the puzzle. I prefer the people who curse at me, and threaten me, but do not ask for hints or help.

[+ar_kayaker]

Don't know if I'd say the puzzle was too hard, but you could have -ahem- at least been a sport and properly attributed all of that text on the Beale Cipher in your description to Simon Singh book from whence it came (http://www.simonsingh.net/The_Code_Book.html).

Actually I cribbed it from a website that didn't credit a source either, and even then I had to edit out some comments from the text to boil it down to just the story. I've never seen or read "The Code Book." I just remembered the Beale Cypher's from years ago (about 1990) when the story went around the BBS's with files that had the DoI, all the numbers, and even a program you could manipulate the numbers with.

 

AK

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I created this cache recently and even though I know at least three local cachers have been working on it (beacuse they have e-mailed asking for hints) It has sat for two nice sunny weekends with no finds. The norm for any any cache to go unfound in this area is no more than a week, even with the puzzle caches.

 

Did I make it too hard?

 

AK

 

I'm not familiar with the Beale cipher so don't know how difficult it is. However, I see that it's rated a 4.5 for difficulty. I worked on another puzzle cache recently (never finished the last piece) that had 13 di9fferent ciphers that had to be decoded. One of them was essentially identlcal to another cache that was rated 5 stars for difficulty. I have solved another 5 star puzzle that took me over a month to solve and I know of some that worked on it over a year before solving it.

 

If you're thinking that you puzzle is too hard, I'd suggest looking up a few 4.5 - 5 star difficulty puzzle caches (you might start here: GCZZZZ ...yes, that is a valid GC number) and try to solve a few to get an idea of what others are considering 4.5- 5 star difficulty puzzles.

[+fizzymagic]

It's not too hard. I solved it in about 10 minutes. But since I have a certain amount of expertise in the area I would say that 4.5 stars is a good rating.

 

ETA: Well, I solved the first group, anyway. But I also found an error in the puzzle that may make it very hard for people to decipher.

 

When I do a puzzle this complicated, I generally run it by one of my buddies from out of town to scrub it for errors! I would be glad to do that for you, here.

Edited September 30, 2009 by fizzymagic

[+W8TTS]

I prefer puzzles that can be solved in the field. I'm afraid yours would go on the Ignore list. But, that's just me, there are people who like these.

[Dj Storm]

I looked at your puzzle, then at the hint, then googled what I thought the hint represents, then chose the most significant result, googled the result to come up with a text, tried to apply the code over the text, and ended up with gibberish. Thought that there must be lots of versions of that text anyhow, and stopped trying to decrypt it.

Then saw your reply, especially this:

I've never seen or read "The Code Book.

and

I had to edit out some comments from the text to boil it down to just the story.

That put me on the right track, and the hint confirmed that this is in fact the right track. Just wanted to point out that 72 lacks a space.

 

I'm not a fan of this kind of puzzles, I prefer those where the hard part is solving the puzzle, not finding it.

Had I lived in the vicinity of this puzzle, I would have ignored it after my first failure to find the suitable text.

[+ar_kayaker]

ETA: Well, I solved the first group, anyway. But I also found an error in the puzzle that may make it very hard for people to decipher.

 

The second paragraph *is* different on purpose, but not so much that a little work won't get it. The other error I may have to fix.

 

Just knowing that at least some people are able to start solving helps. At least I know it's possible and that the star rating is about right.

Edited September 30, 2009 by ar_kayaker

[+flask]

i have a cache that gets found maybe twice a year the average time it takes someone to complete it is ten months. the record time is ten days.

 

everyone who finishes it seems to like it.

 

me, i can't really take responsibility for it; the entire thing came to me one night in a dream and setting it up stole two and a half months of my life.

 

my point here is that no puzzle (properly rated) is too hard for those that will enjoy them. as long as you don't expect a lot of visitors, everything will be toasty.

[+ecanderson]

I've never seen or read "The Code Book."

It's worth your time for a decent read. Am guessing your info came from the Guardian (UK rag). They did provide attribution.

 

I've solved a fair number of ciphers over time, and spent the lousy non-caching days this last winter working over the local puzzle caches with ciphers. You may find that apart from any local puzzle fiends, they won't start dealing with the more difficult puzzles until the weather starts to keep them indoors. In fact, your particular puzzle may not see many takers until Spring for just that reason. I know that I won't take the time to tackle a 4.5 puzzle right now, but certainly will sooner than later. We're about to "fall back" that hour, and there won't be much after-work caching going on pretty soon.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I prefer puzzles that can be solved in the field. I'm afraid yours would go on the Ignore list. But, that's just me, there are people who like these.

 

I'm just the opposite. The amount of time I have available to go out in the field is very limited. I have only been able to get out four days this month. The last was two weeks ago and that was only for one cache that happened to be near a spot I took my mother while she was here visiting from California. The next time I'll be able to get out won't be until October 9th. I actually had to take a day off of work for one of the other days and had another outing on labor day. On the other hand, I pretty much have a couple of hours free every evening when I can work on puzzles from home. Given that my time in the field is so limited I'd rather spend the time that I do have actually looking for geocaches.

[+ar_kayaker]

I prefer puzzles that can be solved in the field. I'm afraid yours would go on the Ignore list. But, that's just me, there are people who like these.

The amount of time I have available to go out in the field is very limited.

 

My time in the field isn't limited, but I too would rather solve puzzles during my idle indoor time (that I have way too much of) and save my field time for actually finding the cache. That's not to say that I won't spend a whole day on one cache if it involves a 12 mile hike in the mountains or an extended tour of an area to find interesting locations that have info-clue (plaques, historical markers, etc). I just don't want to get to GZ and then spend an hour with my decoder ring and calculator to determine where to go next.

 

That's the reason I made this cache. For people like me with time on their hands that can't be spent in the field.

 

AK

[+Sol seaker]

I created this cache recently and even though I know at least three local cachers have been working on it (beacuse they have e-mailed asking for hints) It has sat for two nice sunny weekends with no finds. The norm for any any cache to go unfound in this area is no more than a week, even with the puzzle caches.

 

Did I make it too hard?

 

AK

 

Taking a quick look at it, I'd probably wait until it was the only cache on my page without a smilie for 50 miles, and then I'd ask for a clue.

[+WRASTRO]

I looked at the cache page last night and feel pretty confident that I located the correct text. Didn't feel like spending any time counting words so I will likely never know for sure. I would suggest responding to those who seek hints by telling them they need to think harder before you will give them anything.

[Dangerjackson]

Maybe you should put a gift card or money in it. That seems to make people find them faster.

Or just be patient.

[AZcachemeister]

I bet I know a few locals who could figure this in about 20 minutes, while watching 'Wheel of Fortune' on TV.

[+Parknet]

There seems to be some cachers who solve all the hard puzzles and some (like me) who just don't get it. 2 weeks is not a long time tho. I have a simple multi here that has only had 2 finders in a busy area. They'll get to it. I like to assume they are saving mine for their 1000th find or something great like that. ;-)

[Skippermark]

Puzzles are a weird thing. They seem to be loved or hated. I also find that they will get found by those that like puzzles and then often sit, unfound for long periods because others don't have an interest in them. Then, they'll get found as new cachers start up in the area or people come through on vacation...or to make a run at finding all the puzzles they've solved.

 

Personally, I like puzzles like this because they can be solved. Even if someone doesn't know anything about this type, they can do research and probably figure it out. Those that know about it will figure it out quicker than those that have to do research, but it should be able to be solved by all if they want to put the time into working on it.

[+ecanderson]

 

Did I make it too hard?

 

Finally got around to looking at it. You may have made it too hard by using the wrong year in the clue. Are you sure you didn't mean to say MDCLXVII instead? Everything I see either uses that or MDCLXXIV for the "2nd edition".

[John E Cache]

Did I make it too hard?

If all of those numbers are significant, it looks too time consuming for me. Figuring out what the pattern is usually the "hard" part for me.

[+ecanderson]

Did I make it too hard?

If all of those numbers are significant, it looks too time consuming for me. Figuring out what the pattern is usually the "hard" part for me.

There's no "pattern" to this one, although there is a "system". It's actually not that bad providing you have any clue as to where the writer of the message started the process, and the cache owner not only provided a date (although I'd quibble with it by a year), he provided another clue in his own caching logs (by accident or on purpose, I'm not sure which).

 

Once you have the right source information in front of you to get you going, it's just a somewhat tedious process of looking up all of the information pointed to by the numbers in the puzzle. If I thought there was any chance of visiting his area, I'd go ahead and do the necessary lookups, solve the puzzle, and log that final!

[+JohnnyVegas]

I took a look at your cache page. It looks like a very puzzl My guess it will get fery few hits. There are many easy caches to find and a large number of geocaching it is all about the numberes. In the amount of time it takes to do a puzzle cache or to find a multi cache a person can find dozens of regular caches.

[+Kabuthunk]

*snaps fingers*

 

Shoot, thought I might have had it. I found a way to convert your cache description into excel, with every word being in a seperate cell, thus making it ridiculously easy to find what word corrosponds to what number. However... it looks like that wasn't the key .

 

Well, if others were to use the technique like mine, the actual process of decoding is stupidly easy... I'd just need to find the key.

 

But... given I'm nowhere even remotely close to the area, methinks I've expended as much effort as I'm going to for a cache I will likely never be within a thousand kilometers of

[greenworldfeather]

WOuld it surprise you or strike you as ironic if I said that I had been reading about thatt same code/cipher a few hours ago not knowing about this topic? How about if I said that I am doing a cache similar to this one?

ALso, let me enlighten you with something that I found with codes and ciphers. A code is something that basically, replaces a word, symbol, or phrase with another word symbol or phrase. A cipher does thew same thing, but it goes down one omore lefvel. It does the same thing, only it does it with the letters. Make sense? Hopefully this will straighten out some of the problems with codes/ciphers. THanks. gwf

[+WRASTRO]

WOuld it surprise you or strike you as ironic if I said that I had been reading about thatt same code/cipher a few hours ago not knowing about this topic? How about if I said that I am doing a cache similar to this one?

ALso, let me enlighten you with something that I found with codes and ciphers. A code is something that basically, replaces a word, symbol, or phrase with another word symbol or phrase. A cipher does thew same thing, but it goes down one omore lefvel. It does the same thing, only it does it with the letters. Make sense? Hopefully this will straighten out some of the problems with codes/ciphers. THanks. gwf

No, this does not make sense to me. How do you classify numbers? Your explanation just leaves me scratching my head and saying