Jump to content

Cache Idea ... what do you think?


tachoknight

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hi all-

 

I was thinking of creating a multi-part cache that requires some web interaction. Here's the idea:

 

1. User gets to part 1 with the usual coordinates/hint, etc.

2. Finds cache. Inside is a code and a website URL

3. User goes to URL, enters code and personal identifier (anything...made up name, "whatever", etc.)

4. Website sends back coordinates for one of four secondary caches. It also starts a timer (this will be made known to the user).

5. User goes to second cache at the coordinates and finds it.

6. Inside second cache is another code.

7. User has to enter the secondary code in the website along with the personal identifier from step 3

8. Site tells the user how long it took to get to second cache.

 

The idea is to make a mini-game of "how fast can you get to the second cache", using the website as a way of tracking it and making sure it's all on the up-n-up. The user can, at the second cache, sign the log and post the time taken on the geocaching.com website.

 

The website I refer to would be something I write and hosted on Google's app engine. It would be completely free, absolutely barren of text except for the pages I described (this isn't a scam or advertising thing) and there would be no requirement for any 'real' information (no usernames, no passwords, no nothing).

 

I understand that this would more-or-less require some sort of portable web-enabled device (e.g. iPhone), so I would set its difficulty rating accordingly.

 

Another variant would be needing to do a loop of all four caches, needing to do them in a particular order, based on the codes, which the website would track, so it would know if you did one out of order.

 

I was wondering what others thought of this idea. I have seen other caches that rely on off-site webpages, so I figured there was precedent here. I've had a lot of fun with the more complex caches that involve information-gathering, and I thought this would be my "tech-take" on it, as I'm a programmer, and like to do geeky things ;).

Posted

1. User gets to part 1 with the usual coordinates/hint, etc.

2. Finds cache. Inside is a code and a website URL

3. User goes to URL, enters code and personal identifier (anything...made up name, "whatever", etc.)

4. Website sends back coordinates for one of four secondary caches. It also starts a timer (this will be made known to the user).

5. User goes to second cache at the coordinates and finds it.

6. Inside second cache is another code.

7. User has to enter the secondary code in the website along with the personal identifier from step 3

8. Site tells the user how long it took to get to second cache.

 

The idea is to make a mini-game of "how fast can you get to the second cache", using the website as a way of tracking it and making sure it's all on the up-n-up. The user can, at the second cache, sign the log and post the time taken on the geocaching.com website.

 

 

Probably not for this pair of tech-challenged cachers. :)

Would be a lot of driving home, to cache, to home, to cache. No thanks! ;)

Posted (edited)

Sounds like fun. I would attempt it with my Windows Mobile phone!

 

I did a personal speed cache challange (park, grab two (one trickey) cache and get back to the car) I posted it as a challange on our local forum, but no one took the bait. So I guess that leave me as the undisputed champion (or something). I thought it was tones of fun.

Edited by Andronicus
Posted (edited)

It sounds interesting. Maybe you could post the lowest times, either on the cache page or the app page.

 

I just hope it wouldn't cause people to do risky things like drive too fast.

 

Would it be possible for cachers to go back and improve their "lap time"?

Edited by oakenwood
Posted

Timers can be set in Wherigo, just FYI.

 

If I knew up front that the cache was 1) going to send me back to the computer and 2) was interested in speed, I wouldn't do it. At least not for the first couple of years. I'd wait to see if it developed a reputation. For me, the reputation of a cache is based on WHERE IT TAKES me. Not intricacies of its design. Although a well designed cache is definitely bonus.

Posted

You will want to make sure that you are in compliance with this part of the Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines.

 

Caches that require a geocacher to visit another website will not be published if the finder must create an account with, or provide personal information to, the other website.

Posted

Caches that require a geocacher to visit another website will not be published if the finder must create an account with, or provide personal information to, the other website.

 

Right, the web page would not require any "useful" information and would say so. The use of an identifier would be simply for allowing the program to keep track of the user as they proceed; they could enter "asdf" as an identifier if they so wanted. Also, once the second cache is logged, the tracking info would be deleted.

 

As an additional degree of safety and openness, I would include a link off the geocaching listing page to the code itself, along with how the webpage is put together, so other people could use it if they wanted.

Posted

Timers can be set in Wherigo, just FYI.

 

I've been interested in Wherigo, but I do not have a device that can play the carts, and there aren't very many around the Chicagoland area to justify buying the hardware. I know, it's a chicken-and-egg thing. I figured a standard multi only so that it was available to everyone (well, everyone who also had a smartphone or had a netbook with a cell modem, or a laptop....)

Posted

It sounds interesting. Maybe you could post the lowest times, either on the cache page or the app page.

 

I just hope it wouldn't cause people to do risky things like drive too fast.

 

Would it be possible for cachers to go back and improve their "lap time"?

 

People could do it over and over again to improve their time. I thought about the drive-too-fast aspect; the original idea had the user needing to find cache #2 before the timer ran out or it would not count...I figured that would upset too many people, so I changed it to "whatever your time was".

 

I thought to situate both #1 and #2 around the lakefront/downtown area of Chicago; it would all be within walking distance and driving simply wouldn't be possible. Everything would be sidewalk/beach/large grassy field accessible. :)

Posted
I was thinking of creating a multi-part cache that requires some web interaction. Here's the idea: I'm a programmer, and like to do geeky things :).

There's a cacher here in CT - TheWilkens - and they have created some puzzles that are along the same lines. Not exactly, but they require visits to websites to gather clues. Then, from those clues you might have to go somewhere physical and gather more info, then back to to the web where you print out a paper puzzle to solve and so on.

 

Basically, you take on the role of a detective and actually solve a mystery through the clues you gather on the website in physical locations and so on. At the end you're rewarded with a hike that takes you someplace with a great view.

 

The caches aren't easy and are rated pretty accordingly, but they are loved by those who have done them.

 

Your cache seems like it would be fun for those who like that kind of thing, but it may not be super popular...but that's okay. Caches don't need a million finds to be good, and those that do it will probably love it.

Posted (edited)

Your cache seems like it would be fun for those who like that kind of thing, but it may not be super popular...but that's okay. Caches don't need a million finds to be good, and those that do it will probably love it.

Right, I knew that it would not be for everyone, just like there are some caches that require scuba equipment, mountain-climbing equipment, etc...they're fun for those who have the wherewithal to attempt them; it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that a cache with those kinds of extreme requirements goes months between finds. :)

Edited by tachoknight
Posted (edited)

You will want to make sure that you are in compliance with this part of the Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines.

 

Caches that require a geocacher to visit another website will not be published if the finder must create an account with, or provide personal information to, the other website.

FWIW, I thought of that too. Also, if taking part in the competition for fastest time is required then it's an ALR and hence contravenes the guidelines on that score.

 

Thankfully, there is a way around both issues AFAICT - and that's to make the competition optional (i.e. not required to log the cache). That way, the geocacher is not required to create an account (but may if he or she so wishes) and the competition is just for fun (as opposed to a logging requirement), which is how I suspect the OP means it.

 

HTH,

 

Geoff

 

(Edited to remove typo)

Edited by Pajaholic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...