3 Smiley's on one cache

[+Whiteboy47]

As you can see I don't post a lot here but I do like to read about everybody's views and ideas on here.so I thought I would run my cache idea by ya to see what yall think of it.The cache would be called the chameleon cache which would start off with a ammo can or lock-n lock that's one FTF and smiley.Then after some time I would change the container out to something else and make it alittle harder to find another FTF and smiley.The spot I have picked out I could make 3 or 4 different caches to hide all within ten feet of the first cache.and each time the hide would get harder.i would rate it at one rating and leave it and just post that each hide would go up some instead of try en to change it each time.so some might not like it for that but I like the challenge of the find first then worry about the grid stats later.Is this something you would look for if each hide was done right.any input would be great thanks

[+Morning Dew]

My predication. "They're" going to hate it. Like, really hate it!

 

However, the obvious problem is if you're treating caches as being only found by the same 10 people, but they're not.

 

What if I come to your town 3 years later and your cache comes up as 1.5/1.5 but has "elevated" it to a 5/1.5.

 

Of course, there are more problems as well....but you'll hear them all.....

[+Chrysalides]

I guess you could archive the original and publish a new one near the spot, but depending on how long you leave the original there, you might get questioned by the reviewer about cache permanence. If you don't archive it, most people wouldn't know that it had been changed (unless you contact them) and even then, I wouldn't log multiple finds on the same GC ID, even if it is a different hide. If I do look for it again (unlikely, unless it is close by), I'll log the second find as a note.

[+Annie & PB]

I would only do it once. One GC number equals one find as far as I am concerned.

 

Annie

[+Isonzo Karst]

Most cachers will never see your invitation to log a second or third find as you change the cache. This assuming it's the same GC Code. Most cachers aren't looking at caches they've already found, they search the site for UNFOUND caches.

 

Moreover, if it starts as a 1/1 cache, and you change it to a 2 difficulty and then higher and higher, the people who found your 1/1 will see their stats change as you alter the rating on the cache page. Not a good idea. And if you don't change the rating "i would rate it at one rating and leave it and just post that each hide would go up some instead of try en to change it each time" . then many cachers who may be caching in a hurry or with kids, will get your 1 rated cache, and then arrive to a much much tougher hunt. No fun.

 

The cache page ratings should accurately represent the hide. If you change the difficulty, change the rating. If you change it much, archive the original listing and submit a new cache page.

 

you should place a cache with the intent to leave it in place without major alterations for 3 months.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#perm

[+Kit Fox]

This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Kit Fox

[+bflentje]

I would only do it once. One GC number equals one find as far as I am concerned.

 

Annie

 

Ditto.. but only 99% of the time. If there's a super cache that requires mega-effort, I'd log it multiple times if I visit it multiple times. But I've only done that twice in some 3200 finds.

[+StarBrand]

Thats not likely to fly unless you archive the listing and create a new one in the same spot with each change. You don't want to mess with previous finders stats.

 

I strongly believe in the "One GC number equals one and only one find" concept as well.

[GOF and Bacall]

Anytime a cache hide changes in a significant enough way to change the "feel" of the experience the listing should be archived and a new one created. What you are suggesting sounds more like a way to avoid one aspect of the cache permanency guideline.

[vagabond]

I strongly believe in the "One GC number equals one and only one find" concept as well.

 

A little off topic

I normally do also but there are exceptions, see below

 

San Diego Chupy 1 gc146

original coords-------------new coords

32.55.863------------------32.56.572

117.10.064-----------------117.10.256

 

Cat Box gc15d1

32.56.252-------------------32.50.520

117,13.525------------------117.02.625

 

 

NO 1 Son GCEA6

33.03.938--------------------33.02.602

117.05.258-------------------117.06.149

 

 

XXXXXXXXXXX GCB95

32.56.467--------------------32.56.283

117.14.944-------------------117.14.844

NOTE published dates

Edited November 17, 2009 by vagabond

[+briansnat]

The problem I see is that you would need to change the difficulty each time you make it harder. That mucks with people's stats. A particular problem for people who are doing things like Fizzy Challenge caches.

 

I'd say just archive the old one and submit a new one. By changing the container and making it harder to find you are chainging the essential nature of the hunt. That means it should be a new cache.

[+Prime Suspect]

I guess you could archive the original and publish a new one near the spot, but depending on how long you leave the original there, you might get questioned by the reviewer about cache permanence.

Yes, once the reviewer sees that you're "churning" the site, he or she may say that you have to wait out the 3 month time period (the minimum that caches are supposed to last) before publishing the next one.

[+Whiteboy47]

boy i wish yall would tell me how you really feel lol.like i said this was just a idea i had and yall gave me the input i was looking for thank you.one more thing ROLL TIDE

[+Morning Dew]

This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.

 

While I sympathize with you, this is clearly now a strawman arguement. Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235528

 

Geocaching has changed. You're old school now and not of the norm anymore. This is perfectly fine but the arguements of "caching should take you to Mt. Rushmore" hold no validity anymore. People are looking for new ways to enjoy and play the game. Wether it be power trails or coming up with an idea to log multiple smileys on the same GC number, etc. People don't even blink an eye about 150 film canisters placed in a single file line over 30 miles. In fact, they high five it. The game is just different now. And frankly I think it's for the better even though I don't like some of the changes. But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.

 

And let me be clear, I'm not by any means saying you don't have a right to say what you want but I do think your words go unnoticed the vast majority of the time.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Morning Dew

[+StarBrand]

... Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality....... But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.

 

....

 

How sad for you to be so jaded. In my area, the scenic caches still outnumber the micro under a bush hides and I hope it stays that way.

[knowschad]

This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.

 

While I sympathize with you, this is clearly now a strawman arguement. Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235528

 

Geocaching has changed. You're old school now and not of the norm anymore. This is perfectly fine but the arguements of "caching should take you to Mt. Rushmore" hold no validity anymore. People are looking for new ways to enjoy and play the game. Wether it be power trails or coming up with an idea to log multiple smileys on the same GC number, etc. People don't even blink an eye about 150 film canisters placed in a single file line over 30 miles. In fact, they high five it. The game is just different now. And frankly I think it's for the better even though I don't like some of the changes. But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.

 

And let me be clear, I'm not by any means saying you don't have a right to say what you want but I do think your words go unnoticed the vast majority of the time.

 

By golly, you young whippershapper... back in MY day, we had caches that made you walk two miles uphill both ways in bare feet. But at least we had an ammo box at the end of it, and not some new-fangled plastic lock & whatever thing for storing leftover creamed corn.

 

Seriously... I thought that was a very good post. Times have changed, and you can gripe about it all you want, but that is not likely to bring back the "good ol' days".

 

Disclaimer: This post will most likely be used against me at some point in the future.

Edited November 18, 2009 by knowschad

[knowschad]

... Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality....... But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.

....

How sad for you to be so jaded. In my area, the scenic caches still outnumber the micro under a bush hides and I hope it stays that way.

Remember... he resides in the area where the Rogue Reviewer lurks.

[+WRASTRO]

This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.

 

While I sympathize with you, this is clearly now a strawman arguement. Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235528

 

Geocaching has changed. You're old school now and not of the norm anymore. This is perfectly fine but the arguements of "caching should take you to Mt. Rushmore" hold no validity anymore. People are looking for new ways to enjoy and play the game. Wether it be power trails or coming up with an idea to log multiple smileys on the same GC number, etc. People don't even blink an eye about 150 film canisters placed in a single file line over 30 miles. In fact, they high five it. The game is just different now. And frankly I think it's for the better even though I don't like some of the changes. But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.

 

And let me be clear, I'm not by any means saying you don't have a right to say what you want but I do think your words go unnoticed the vast majority of the time.

While I understand your concept here I simply can't agree with the premise. To me this is like saying we should no longer aspire to and maintain high moral values since so many others do not. I encourage you to not give in to these feelings. We can make a difference if we continue to try to do so, regardless of the particular activity.

 

"Those days of geocaching" still exist and are strong. Every one of us who cares about this game should continue to encourage others to play the game well and always try to improve it. Education is a big part of this. Be active in your local community and encourage higher quality hides and behavior. Don't give up and don't give in.

[+Morning Dew]

This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.

 

While I sympathize with you, this is clearly now a strawman arguement. Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235528

 

Geocaching has changed. You're old school now and not of the norm anymore. This is perfectly fine but the arguements of "caching should take you to Mt. Rushmore" hold no validity anymore. People are looking for new ways to enjoy and play the game. Wether it be power trails or coming up with an idea to log multiple smileys on the same GC number, etc. People don't even blink an eye about 150 film canisters placed in a single file line over 30 miles. In fact, they high five it. The game is just different now. And frankly I think it's for the better even though I don't like some of the changes. But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.

 

And let me be clear, I'm not by any means saying you don't have a right to say what you want but I do think your words go unnoticed the vast majority of the time.

While I understand your concept here I simply can't agree with the premise. To me this is like saying we should no longer aspire to and maintain high moral values since so many others do not. I encourage you to not give in to these feelings. We can make a difference if we continue to try to do so, regardless of the particular activity.

 

"Those days of geocaching" still exist and are strong. Every one of us who cares about this game should continue to encourage others to play the game well and always try to improve it. Education is a big part of this. Be active in your local community and encourage higher quality hides and behavior. Don't give up and don't give in.

 

Maybe my words were misunderstood?

 

Jaded. How can telling the truth be jaded? It's just the way it is. The number of interesting hides FAR out number the interesting hides. It's totally subjective but would you say it's in the neighborhood of 10 to 1. Maybe 50 to 1? How about 100 to 1? Personally, I'd bet it's even higher than that but again it's so subjective.

 

And if the geocaching community as whole cared, geocaching wouldn't work right? It would just fold under it's own weight. Someone out there must enjoy the caches being placed. My guess, "they", are the vast majority and I believe the membership is still growing.

 

Again, reread my post. I didn't say "quality" caches don't exist anymore. I just said the game has changed. Educate people on what? To play the game your way. Do you think they don't know that what you and I consider quality caches exist? Well of course they do. They don't need your education, they're well aware of it and have decided to play the game differently. Again, I support them. It doesn't mean I have to join them, but I do support them.

 

Most importantly, I didn't realize we had higher moral values than others! Cool! Wait 'til I start telling people I have higher moral values because I like "long hike" hides over LPC's. That should an interesting conversation.

 

I don't get the rogue reviewer comment and my location. How does that factor in how I think? You do realize, I prefer "high quality" caches over LPC's. Maybe I didn't make it clear enough. However, I totally respect and "get" the way others play the game. Perhaps you meant something else? I'm not sure.

 

This morning for me was a perfect example of why I "get" the popularity of P&G or "easy" caches. I had a 45 minute drive between work and an appoitment that was one hour after I left work. I could sit in a lobby for 15 minutes or I could do a cache. I thought about doing the cache on the top of Mt. McKinley but 15 minutes just wouldn't be enough time for me. So I opted for a fence hang on the way to my appointment. Was it earth shattering fun. Nope, but it was fun and on top of it I found a ball field I didn't know existed. The whole experience probably won't be posted in Reader's Digest but it beat waiting in a lobby. I did feel my morals being lowered doing it though

Edited November 18, 2009 by Morning Dew

[Clan Riffster]

any input would be great thanks

Hi WhiteBoy, thanx for asking!

I think it's way kewl that you are wanting to do something other than tossing out another film can under yet another lamp post. You get mucho kudos just for that! However, this may be a case where your enthusiasm for this, our favorite past time, may have outrun your experience. As many have stated far more eloquently than I could, this idea would probably not work out as you intended. Kit Fox gave some great advice, despite his detractor.

 

Good luck!

 

-Sean

 

Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore.

Those days may be long gone for you, but I can assure you they are not long gone for me. I have carefully crafted my PQs so that those caches which don't fit my biased caching aesthetic mostly don't exist. This leaves me with almost 100% hides that appeal to me. As for your suggestion that those of us who appreciate so called quality hides simply lay down and accept our fate, I think that's just defeatist. I spend a lot of time talking to other cachers, promoting my version of quality over quantity, and judging from the hides that are being published, I think I've had an impact. When I see someone who formerly hid naught but P&Gs, suddenly switch to imaginative hides in interesting locations, soon after hearing my speech, I realize that I may have guided them to step outside their former comfort zone and test drive something a little harder. Any argument that promotes quality should not be disparaged.

 

You can lay down if you want.

 

I'm just getting warmed up!

[+Kit Fox]

This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.

 

While I sympathize with you, this is clearly now a strawman arguement. Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235528

 

Geocaching has changed. You're old school now and not of the norm anymore. This is perfectly fine but the arguements of "caching should take you to Mt. Rushmore" hold no validity anymore. People are looking for new ways to enjoy and play the game. Wether it be power trails or coming up with an idea to log multiple smileys on the same GC number, etc. People don't even blink an eye about 150 film canisters placed in a single file line over 30 miles. In fact, they high five it. The game is just different now. And frankly I think it's for the better even though I don't like some of the changes. But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.

 

 

There were plenty of lame caches when I started in 2004, however, the number of lame caches has grown exponentially in the pass 5 years. Their are still plenty of "spectacular caches" being hidden today. A few years ago I recognized the degradation of the "version of geocaching I like to play." Like my buddy Clan Riffster says, a few carefully crafted PQs, can keep me well within my "fun zone."

 

Recipe for fun, Share your techniques for avoiding caches you dislike.

 

And let me be clear, I'm not by any means saying you don't have a right to say what you want but I do think your words go unnoticed the vast majority of the time.

 

I've seen the game change far more in five years than your short time being involved. Decent cachers still take the time to write nice, descriptive logs, on good caches. As long as I still get good logs on my great caches, i'm going to continue hiding them.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Kit Fox

[Mr.Yuck]

 

And if the geocaching community as whole cared, geocaching wouldn't work right? It would just fold under it's own weight. Someone out there must enjoy the caches being placed. My guess, "they", are the vast majority and I believe the membership is still growing.

 

 

I'd disagree with "they" are the vast majority. The number oriented Geocachers seem to me to be few in number, greatly outnumbered by casual Geocachers (whom I consider the vast majority), and the grumpy old schooler's like myself (when combined, of course). It's just the numbers oriented cachers are the ones running out to every cache listed in their areas, and hiding the lower quality numbers oriented caches in large quantities.

 

So what you're saying is, just sit back and let to game continue on it's present course until the vast majority of caches listed on Geocaching.com are micros in parking lots, cemeteries, and stuck on signs up and down every rural road? And the Travel Bug practically becomes extinct? Heck no, I won't go.

[Skippermark]

If the cache is over 3 months old, archive it and create a new one, but instead of doing that, why not just hide 3 or 4 separate caches that will stand on their own for a longer period of time?

 

As noted, most cachers will never see the note to come and find the new one because their PQs don't include found caches. Also, most cachers I know want to see new places and not return to the same spot to find a slightly different cache.

 

Plus, as noted earlier, it's frustrating to find a cache with one rating and then the owner changes the hide later. We've found a couple difficult caches that were high rated, and then for whatever reason they got changed to a 1.5 later on. All those people that had found the 4.5 difficulty esentially just had their find taken away and replaced with an easy find.

[+Whiteboy47]

i just wanted to say thanks to Clan Riffster for your reply. you seemed to get what i was asking i was just thinking outside the box to come up with something different i try to make all my hides fun and not something you just walk up and find as i don't live in the mountains or desert so i really don't have all that much to offer like the history of an area, it's great scenery, most of those places already have caches.and i was not even thinking about trying to bribe folks to find a cache.so for now back to the drawing board happy caching

[GOF and Bacall]

So this one isn't the best, so what. Keep trying. The next idea may remake the hobby.

[daveindeal]

dont know if its been covered but what if.....

 

you have a cache listing (XXX) near to where your target area set as a standard cache rated 1/1, inside you have 8 cache listings of the others that you are placing

 

the other ones are all mystery cache and you state that the location is inside cache listing XXX.

 

then you have each of the caches with increasing levels

 

1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5

 

this way they can pick and chose how hard they want to go. and they have the oppotunity if they tackel all of them to get 9 little smiles (main cache listing and 8 harder ones) and 9 FTF.

 

if you then wanted to expand there is the possability of upping the teraine as well.

[GOF and Bacall]

dont know if its been covered but what if.....

 

you have a cache listing (XXX) near to where your target area set as a standard cache rated 1/1, inside you have 8 cache listings of the others that you are placing

 

the other ones are all mystery cache and you state that the location is inside cache listing XXX.

 

then you have each of the caches with increasing levels

 

1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5

 

this way they can pick and chose how hard they want to go. and they have the oppotunity if they tackel all of them to get 9 little smiles (main cache listing and 8 harder ones) and 9 FTF.

 

if you then wanted to expand there is the possability of upping the teraine as well.

 

Interesting. But how about this twist on that very same idea? Each cache has the coordinates for the next, increasingly difficult, cache in the progression.

[daveindeal]

dont know if its been covered but what if.....

 

you have a cache listing (XXX) near to where your target area set as a standard cache rated 1/1, inside you have 8 cache listings of the others that you are placing

 

the other ones are all mystery cache and you state that the location is inside cache listing XXX.

 

then you have each of the caches with increasing levels

 

1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5

 

this way they can pick and chose how hard they want to go. and they have the oppotunity if they tackel all of them to get 9 little smiles (main cache listing and 8 harder ones) and 9 FTF.

 

if you then wanted to expand there is the possability of upping the teraine as well.

 

Interesting. But how about this twist on that very same idea? Each cache has the coordinates for the next, increasingly difficult, cache in the progression.

 

Thats brilliant, i like the sound of that..... i was racking my brain thinking of changes to make befor i posted it and thought it needed a little tweek but couldnt think what but 'GOF & Bacall' found tht little tweek !!

[GOF and Bacall]

dont know if its been covered but what if.....

 

you have a cache listing (XXX) near to where your target area set as a standard cache rated 1/1, inside you have 8 cache listings of the others that you are placing

 

the other ones are all mystery cache and you state that the location is inside cache listing XXX.

 

then you have each of the caches with increasing levels

 

1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5

 

this way they can pick and chose how hard they want to go. and they have the oppotunity if they tackel all of them to get 9 little smiles (main cache listing and 8 harder ones) and 9 FTF.

 

if you then wanted to expand there is the possability of upping the teraine as well.

 

Interesting. But how about this twist on that very same idea? Each cache has the coordinates for the next, increasingly difficult, cache in the progression.

 

Thats brilliant, i like the sound of that..... i was racking my brain thinking of changes to make befor i posted it and thought it needed a little tweek but couldnt think what but 'GOF & Bacall' found tht little tweek !!

 

Careful, my hat is tight enough as it is.

[+Whiteboy47]

dont know if its been covered but what if.....

 

you have a cache listing (XXX) near to where your target area set as a standard cache rated 1/1, inside you have 8 cache listings of the others that you are placing

 

the other ones are all mystery cache and you state that the location is inside cache listing XXX.

 

then you have each of the caches with increasing levels

 

1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5

 

this way they can pick and chose how hard they want to go. and they have the oppotunity if they tackel all of them to get 9 little smiles (main cache listing and 8 harder ones) and 9 FTF.

 

if you then wanted to expand there is the possability of upping the teraine as well.

 

Interesting. But how about this twist on that very same idea? Each cache has the coordinates for the next, increasingly difficult, cache in the progression.

 

Thats brilliant, i like the sound of that..... i was racking my brain thinking of changes to make befor i posted it and thought it needed a little tweek but couldnt think what but 'GOF & Bacall' found tht little tweek !!

 

Careful, my hat is tight enough as it is.

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner i knew somewhere between the bashing i was getting for my idea lol someone just might throw out something i could use and you two have thank you.I love the idea about the levels going up.ok let me ask this would you try to keep em close together like in the woods or maybe spread them out some in the city

[Skippermark]

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner i knew somewhere between the bashing i was getting for my idea lol someone just might throw out something i could use and you two have thank you.I love the idea about the levels going up.ok let me ask this would you try to keep em close together like in the woods or maybe spread them out some in the city

We weren't bashing. You asked for people's opinions on an idea you had, and people responded with what they thought. If it wasn't in accordance with yours, that's not bashing; it's just a difference of opinion.

 

As far as where to place them, I like the idea of putting them all in one park, a loop or something through the area. If the hike is linear, the only downside I see is that the further out people go, the harder the caches get. If someone DNFs one of the hard ones, they might be less likely to go back and try to find it if they have to walk a mile into the woods for a 4.5 and another possible DNF. But, if it could be setup so the harder ones are closer to parking, people might be more likely to return and try again. I know for me, I wouldn't mind going back to a hard cache if it's close to parking, but I would probably skip it if I had to walk really far and had already DNFd it a couple times.

[+Whiteboy47]

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner i knew somewhere between the bashing i was getting for my idea lol someone just might throw out something i could use and you two have thank you.I love the idea about the levels going up.ok let me ask this would you try to keep em close together like in the woods or maybe spread them out some in the city

We weren't bashing. You asked for people's opinions on an idea you had, and people responded with what they thought. If it wasn't in accordance with yours, that's not bashing; it's just a difference of opinion.

 

As far as where to place them, I like the idea of putting them all in one park, a loop or something through the area. If the hike is linear, the only downside I see is that the further out people go, the harder the caches get. If someone DNFs one of the hard ones, they might be less likely to go back and try to find it if they have to walk a mile into the woods for a 4.5 and another possible DNF. But, if it could be setup so the harder ones are closer to parking, people might be more likely to return and try again. I know for me, I wouldn't mind going back to a hard cache if it's close to parking, but I would probably skip it if I had to walk really far and had already DNFd it a couple times.

first let me say i used the wrong word bashing i was just useing it in fun.i did put it out there for your opinion good or bad and i got the answer it was bad real bad.I can live with that but i did get a great idea from this so it goes to show that these forums do work.I agree with you about the long hike in the woods so i've decided to use a national forest about 30 miles from my house that has roads going all around it.so i can hide all levels and you will be able to park right at all the hides and just walk in the woods so many feet to the cache.if you would like to take a look at the spot it's called tuskegee national forest

[GOF and Bacall]

I'd spread 'em out. Perhaps put a puzzle in for the location of the next. As they get progressively more difficult to get to the difficulty of the puzzle gets harder. That way you go from a 1/1 to start up the scale to a 5/5 with the final puzzle being some obscure code or something. If you want to put out a lot of caches you could fill the grid. Hides going from 1/1up to 1/5 then to 2/1 up to 2/5 and so on.

[+gearhedd]

I have changed a couple of my caches slightly because of muggles or loaction. And posted that cachers could come back a find cache again for another . And I'm not the only cacher that has done this.

 

So I would do a cache like this, however I'm not into the stat grids, and for those that do they may not like this cache.

 

On another note, I have gone back to check on my own caches and was not able to find quickly, at times having to search for some time..... I have just about thought about posting a find, considering the few dnfs before hand. It's possible to do so, but not to.

[+Whiteboy47]

I'd spread 'em out. Perhaps put a puzzle in for the location of the next. As they get progressively more difficult to get to the difficulty of the puzzle gets harder. That way you go from a 1/1 to start up the scale to a 5/5 with the final puzzle being some obscure code or something. If you want to put out a lot of caches you could fill the grid. Hides going from 1/1up to 1/5 then to 2/1 up to 2/5 and so on.

i like this idea too as i can make the difficuty go up but for the terrain it's pretty flat around here so i couldn't really go up on it.have any ideas on where most folks get there puzzles from i looked on the web some.i think to be fair they should be able to do them on the spot with out going to the web to look something up as most folks will have to drive some ways to get to these caches.I think i will do two series one with puzzles on one side of the park and one with out on the other side of the park i know some folks don't like puzzles so both worlds will be covered thanks GOF

[GOF and Bacall]

I have changed a couple of my caches slightly because of muggles or loaction. And posted that cachers could come back a find cache again for another . And I'm not the only cacher that has done this.

 

So I would do a cache like this, however I'm not into the stat grids, and for those that do they may not like this cache.

 

On another note, I have gone back to check on my own caches and was not able to find quickly, at times having to search for some time..... I have just about thought about posting a find, considering the few dnfs before hand. It's possible to do so, but not to.

 

If the hide is changed enough that you feel a cacher should be allowed to log it for another find you should probably archive it and submit a new cache listing. Just a thought.

 

You can't please everyone all the time so don't even try. Place a cache that you think is the best you can do and don't worry that some may not like it. There are plenty of caches they will like.

 

I have one cache in the roots of a tree that Mother Nature rehid. I could not find it. Put a new container in there and all was well for several months. Then one day I get a found log asking why there are two ammo cans under the same tree. DOH!

[GOF and Bacall]

I'd spread 'em out. Perhaps put a puzzle in for the location of the next. As they get progressively more difficult to get to the difficulty of the puzzle gets harder. That way you go from a 1/1 to start up the scale to a 5/5 with the final puzzle being some obscure code or something. If you want to put out a lot of caches you could fill the grid. Hides going from 1/1up to 1/5 then to 2/1 up to 2/5 and so on.

i like this idea too as i can make the difficuty go up but for the terrain it's pretty flat around here so i couldn't really go up on it.have any ideas on where most folks get there puzzles from i looked on the web some.i think to be fair they should be able to do them on the spot with out going to the web to look something up as most folks will have to drive some ways to get to these caches.I think i will do two series one with puzzles on one side of the park and one with out on the other side of the park i know some folks don't like puzzles so both worlds will be covered thanks GOF

 

This is kind of fun. I can't wait to read the first find logs.