Jump to content

new park! Multi or multiple caches?


Recommended Posts

Posted

So there is a park near my house, it's more of a preserve actually. Basically the whole place is fenced in, allows dogs to run around, has a few little plaques with info about various plants and wildlife. Pretty basic little setup. There are currently two caches in this park. A nano and a micro, one of which needs maint. every couple of weeks for one reason or another. Anyways, the park is divided by a stream and one half really hasn't been accessible. They have just made a path that winds around the other half and I'd say there is about a good half mile of trails.

 

All of that aside, if you had free reign of this, to either place a cache or find one, would you rather see a fun multi that gets you all over the place or a series of caches in similar places. My idea was to have a little fun with some of the common caches out there and do them all in a multi in one way or another. Or I could do all of the same deals, but do 4 separate caches?

 

Guess I'm just not sure what people prefer. The smilies or the adventure?

 

PS and I know some of you might not like the idea of me hogging up all this new space with MY caches, but I figure people have had a chance and now we have two "lame" caches in a pretty cool little park(micro in the woods?). So I figure it's time to make this place shine :P

Posted

I love well thought out multis but if you want people to look for your caches you are better off placing a few traditionals. Or try a multi with a traditional or two sprinkled along the route.

Posted

So there is a park near my house, it's more of a preserve actually. Basically the whole place is fenced in, allows dogs to run around, has a few little plaques with info about various plants and wildlife. Pretty basic little setup. There are currently two caches in this park. A nano and a micro, one of which needs maint. every couple of weeks for one reason or another. Anyways, the park is divided by a stream and one half really hasn't been accessible. They have just made a path that winds around the other half and I'd say there is about a good half mile of trails.

 

All of that aside, if you had free reign of this, to either place a cache or find one, would you rather see a fun multi that gets you all over the place or a series of caches in similar places. My idea was to have a little fun with some of the common caches out there and do them all in a multi in one way or another. Or I could do all of the same deals, but do 4 separate caches?

 

Guess I'm just not sure what people prefer. The smilies or the adventure?

 

PS and I know some of you might not like the idea of me hogging up all this new space with MY caches, but I figure people have had a chance and now we have two "lame" caches in a pretty cool little park(micro in the woods?). So I figure it's time to make this place shine :P

 

I don't do multi caches so.... well you get the idea.

Posted

I would have to say it depends on what the area is like. If there are good spots for multiple traditionals I would probably lean in that direction. If it is a cool area in general but doesn't have many good spots for traditionals I would go with the multi idea. We have a park nearby that is mostly boardwalk for the trail so it does not work well for traditionals. There is a nice multi that covers the entire loop and shows off the area.

Posted

I'm not a real big fan of multi's.When i first started geocaching i went for a few and found some of the stages missing so you couldn't finish them so that sorta turned me off a multi's.How about a mystery tour with muliple hides where you have to find one hide to get the cords for the next one.

Posted

nice idea whiteboy. Cool thing is this park is about three blocks from my house, so the missing stages wouldn't be a big deal, but I have run into the problem as well and it's always a hassle trying to get back out there to finish them with so many lazy cache owners.

I'm gonna walk the route again and figure out some basic ideas, hide spots and distances to see what I have to work with. The one micro is somewhat close to this new trailhead, so it will play into it a little bit. I'm leaning towards multiple traditionals though, having a little fun with each of them and maybe work a mystery cache, 3 or 4 star hide based off the others.

Posted

It may come down to whether you have enough swag to fill multiple caches.

 

You could have the best of both worlds by placing multiple caches, each with partial coordinates to the final. That way, people can seek one, some, or all.

Posted

How about placing one really nice hide and leaving the rest of the park for others to hide in? I don't understand why you feel the need to use it all up by yourself.

 

I don't think i HAVE to fill it up, but I've never done a multi, so the thought crossed my mind. I think most people would be a bit more pleased with me "filling" up the park with quality hides, rather than one hide that gets no love from it's owner and another thats a nano. If I do go the multiple traditional route, I'm not going to go place five caches in one go. I'd start with one and go from there and all would be fun and interesting hides.

Posted

What briansnat said.

 

I'm out there in the minority that prefers multi-caches. That said, there should be a reason to create the cache as a multi-cache. Either because you're helping people with route finding, or because you can develop a theme.

Both would be cool! Create the fewest stages that will work.

 

I placed a multi-cache in the SW corner of a large preserve about a year ago. It showed people that the area exists with a loop trail (rough unmaintained but with old berms that allow you to cross the swamp and circle). The other sections of the preserve are cache dense, almost ridiculously so near the parking, but there were no hides at all in that section (this is a large area). Now 8 traditional caches have been placed by 5 different people in that section. I may well pull my multi in the spring (caching will end for the hot summer season then) and further open the area to other hides.

Posted

How about placing one really nice hide and leaving the rest of the park for others to hide in? I don't understand why you feel the need to use it all up by yourself.

 

I don't think i HAVE to fill it up, but I've never done a multi, so the thought crossed my mind. I think most people would be a bit more pleased with me "filling" up the park with quality hides, rather than one hide that gets no love from it's owner and another thats a nano. If I do go the multiple traditional route, I'm not going to go place five caches in one go. I'd start with one and go from there and all would be fun and interesting hides.

 

Don't place a multi just because you can. If you are going to make it a multi, try to make it very interesting. If it has three stages, make it as interesting as what you might get from three individuals. Some people don't like to go through a lot of work just to get one smiley, but if the multi is good enough, those that generally enjoy them will remember yours.

 

If you go the multiple traditional routes, and place one at a time you'll run the risk of someone finding the first one, thinking the area could use another one, and throw down a cache at the spur of the moment in the area. On the other hand, having multple COs in a park could help with cache maintenance.

Posted

When I'm out hiking I usually don't want a guided tour. I want to go in whatever direction I feel like on the spur of the moment. Or I want to plan a route myself with the option of changing it up on a whim. So there have been multis that I have quit on just because I didn't feel like going in "that direction."

The one type of multi I really like is where stage one is a micro at the parking area and stage two is somewhere down the trail. That way if you forget to waypoint your vehicle, all you have to do is go back to the first cache of the day. Out here in Long Island there are a number of nice loops of 4 or 5 caches where the first is a multi as described and the rest are individual caches that eventually bring you back near the start. I have done some nice multis but mostly they're like, "What was the point?"

Posted

The problem with multis stems with our society's need for instant gratification and reward. If members are set on having (their find count) >= (find count of the completition)+1 then mutli-caches are a waste of time.

 

In my early days of caching, I found quite a few caches and my find count was fairly high - 2 or three per week. However when the caches became more numerous and easier to reach everyone's cache find count increased dramatically. As more and more parking lot caches came out, more people could find caches quickly. Since that wasn't my cup of tea, I didn't play that game. Since my lifestyle changed and caching to a second seat to other things like family and volunteering for worthwhile organizations, my caching dropped off considerably, but I found I could still participate in geocaching through the forums and occasional planned hunts with friends. There was a cacher that actually said that he had respected my opinions and posts, but since he matched and bettered my life-time find count in a few months that he didn't think I had much to contribute. Good thing I never really cared about his opinion. :P

My point is, that people are so driven by find count that they will skip over a park that has a well-thought-out multi in favor of several traditionals simply because of the time involved in scoring one smiley versus several.

 

It is for this reason that I suggest you place a well-thought-out multi. :)

 

Don't forget also that you can have those stages of the multi be "questions to answer" and not have them block the proximity of other caches being placed. That seems like the ultimate win-win situation.

 

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

Cache containers and physical stages should generally be separated by a minimum of 0.1 miles (528 feet or 161 m). A physical stage is defined as any stage that contains a physical element placed by the geocache owner, such as a tag with the next set of coordinates or a container. Non-physical caches or stages including reference points, trailhead/parking coordinates and question to answer waypoints are exempt from this guideline.
Posted (edited)
That said, there should be a reason to create the cache as a multi-cache. Either because you're helping people with route finding, or because you can develop a theme.

Yes, something like this sounds like it would be fun to find. I don't like multis that are placed simply for the sake of placing a multi, where there's stages in a random spots just because they need to drop a container somewhere to make it a multi.

 

I like multis that take you on a specially designed route, and the stages are placed to bring people a certain way and past certain things the owner wants people to see.

 

I like multis that use plaques where one or more stages takes you to an area with some cool historical info where you can read and learn some interesting info.

 

If the park can support it and it would be well designed, I'd place a multi that uses the plaques to gather info and then hide a couple traditionals along the way.

Edited by Skippermark
Posted

Just beware of the 0.1 mile distance thing. Most reviewers measure as the crow flies. That means that just because there is a stream/creek/river in the way, you can't have two caches directly across that body of water if the straight line is less than .1 mile (even though it could be 1+ mile to actually walk between the two points. I learned that the hard way.

Posted (edited)

Just beware of the 0.1 mile distance thing. Most reviewers measure as the crow flies. That means that just because there is a stream/creek/river in the way, you can't have two caches directly across that body of water if the straight line is less than .1 mile (even though it could be 1+ mile to actually walk between the two points. I learned that the hard way.

And...stages of the same multi can be as close together as you want as long as any none of the stages are closer than .1 to any other cache, so in theory, someone could place a 52 stage multi with each stage 10 feet from the previous one.

Edited by Skippermark
Posted

I'll be the first to admit that I'm more likely to hunt a traditional over a multi. I also like finding caches from multiple finders on the same trail.

 

Go with whichever you think you can maintain and let the people that want to hunt for it do so. Somewhere in your area there is that one guy that just loves multis and is wishing he could find a new one. Your multi might make his day.

 

If you're okay with less traffic and you think it's a hide worth finding, then go for it.

Posted

I typically hunt traditionals more than multis. However, I'm starting to change my opinion and really enjoy a good multi from time to time. I don't know how it is in your area, but in mine there are many more traditionals than multis so I'd vote for the multi. Mainly just to increase the diversity of cache types if it was near me. From the way you describe your thought process I'm confident that the local cachers in your area will appreciate it no matter which direction you go. :P

Posted

For me to do a multi, it has to be good enough that I hear about it from other cachers as a "must-do" cache. Otherwise, I filter them from my pocket queries and don't even see them on my GPSr.

 

 

One fun twist that I've seen, though, was a series of five caches. Each one contained a stack of recipe cards and a plastic template. The template was different in each cache. You took one of the recipe cards from the first cache that you hit, laid the template over it, and traced the lines with your pen/pencil onto the card. You took that card with you to the other four caches, where you did the same with the template in each of those. When you had completed them all, you had the coordinates for a final, 6th cache, which was listed as a puzzle cache. It was very cool.

Posted

I like to hide multi's but they don't get visited nearly as often asd my singler stage caches. Like Markwell said, people want the instant gratification these days. The logs on my multi's are much better though as people seem to enjoy them *if* they take the time to hunt them.

 

For example I have two caches in one park - a two stage multi with a unique redirector, and a traditional. The traditional get found frequently, the multi? Not so much, even though it's .1 from the traditional. :P

Posted

I like all of the general types of caches. I generally won't look for parking lot caches or guardrail caches unless they're especially challenging. One in Pittsburgh registered two DNF's just from me. That sort of thing was common, even for more experienced cachers. But I like to do multi's from time to time.

 

I'll agree that there ought to be a reason for it. I did one recently (3 stages) where the stupid thing just sent me from stage one to stage two, and then right back pretty close to stage one for stage three. I found myself asking "why?" The final was a tough hide, but it could have been a tough traditional, IMO. The first two stages were just too easy.

Posted

Personally I like Multis, especially those which use "Question to Answer" waypoints (e.g. information from a sign), and especially if they lead you around a nice area. That's probably because are a number of really well done Multis of this type in my area, and they have been some of my favorites.

 

But I've also enjoyed rings of traditional caches which lead you around in the same way.

 

I'm not so keen on Multis which have multiple physical caches. That's because I enjoy the walk to the caches more than the search for the cache; and I'm not the greatest at finding. It's not that I want multiple smileys, but what bothers me is that if I can't find one of the cache stages, then I can't get a smiley at all.

Posted
I like to hide multi's but they don't get visited nearly as often asd my singler stage caches. Like Markwell said, people want the instant gratification these days. The logs on my multi's are much better though as people seem to enjoy them *if* they take the time to hunt them.

That's why mixing in some traditionals is a good idea of the hike is long enough. Those that way a good amount of finds can find a few traditionals, and those that want a multi to guide them along the way can get that too.

 

Aroudn here, when people find a "lonely" multi, they'll hide some new traditionals along the trail. Suddenly that multi that used to get found 6 times a year starts getting found every couple weeks as people do the hike to find the traditionals.

Posted

For me to do a multi, it has to be good enough that I hear about it from other cachers as a "must-do" cache. Otherwise, I filter them from my pocket queries and don't even see them on my GPSr.

 

 

One fun twist that I've seen, though, was a series of five caches. Each one contained a stack of recipe cards and a plastic template. The template was different in each cache. You took one of the recipe cards from the first cache that you hit, laid the template over it, and traced the lines with your pen/pencil onto the card. You took that card with you to the other four caches, where you did the same with the template in each of those. When you had completed them all, you had the coordinates for a final, 6th cache, which was listed as a puzzle cache. It was very cool.

 

Took cool looking template, Left golfball. TFTC.

Posted

The park isn't THAT big, 50 acres from a document I saw on the counties site. It has roughly 100ft of elevation change from the parking lot to the top. My early idea for the multi included ideas like something towards an earth cache / mystery where you needed to solve questions for each stage and those questions were part of what was in front of you. Though it might be fun, I don't think it would be wildly popular. The other one was to do tricky/evil/original hides. Though I guess just doing three traditionals would be the same thing. I guess at this point I'll start with a traditional or two, but maybe try to work in a multi/mystery based off those. Maybe do some sort of black light writing inside the container or use of a "decoder ring".

I've had a couple of ideas for hides and this might be the perfect place to put a couple of them to use. I'm never against an ammo can in the woods, but I get really annoyed with a micro. What I really love is borderline original hides in the woods and I'd love to go that route. A few hides in the cool container thread have my brain going and I'd love to build off of those and give people something fun as it's pretty dull in the general area of this park.

Posted (edited)

update: I was just reading this document on the site and buried in the type on the last page mentions the parks department actually owns another 80 acres adjacent to the land and hasn't developed it. So even if I "filled up" this 50 acres, there is another 80 acres that will most likely see public use soon. Though my plan was never to fill it up, just stoked to see some vacant space for once. We'll see what happens.....

Edited by NWCREW
Posted

I think it's funny that some of the same people saying numbers aren't important also say they don't prefer multicaches. I don't get that... :P

 

I prefer multicaches but only if they're reasonably short and well maintained. I despise auto-tours and I hate more than anything is a multicache that makes you walk extreme distances, to some useless point, only to wrap back around and have the final darn near the starting point.

 

I love nice multicaches but I can't stand evil people trying to be cute.

Posted

The problem with multis stems with our society's need for instant gratification and reward. If members are set on having (their find count) >= (find count of the completition)+1 then mutli-caches are a waste of time.

 

 

While this is true for some of the cachers out there, it is a somewhat simplistic view of how many, if not most feel.

 

Most cachers I've talked with, or read their comments on the forum, have other reasons to not do a lot of multis.

 

For myself, I learned early in the game not to go for any that do not give some indication of how far they will take you. I have limited mobility, and it is quite disappointing to start on a cache, do the first few stages, then discover the final is beyond my physical abilities.

 

I usually try to figure out if I can do a cache before I go for it. I have found that sometimes I am wrong. I get to where I will start and find it is beyond my ability. If it is a traditional, no real problem, I can just go to the next one. However, I hate to start on a cache, do a couple stages then have to skip the rest of it.

 

For me it has nothing to do with one or ten smileys. It just doesn't feel finished if I don't get to the final.

Posted

the first multi I did had the first WP, right near my house, so I figured, hey, may as well check it out. Found it and it had the listed coordinates, typed them in and the final was a good 3 miles away, ouch.

Posted

I think it's funny that some of the same people saying numbers aren't important also say they don't prefer multicaches. I don't get that... :P

If people cache with kids, they may not be concerned with the numbers, but they still may not like multis because it can be boring for kids finding lots of interim stages and not finding a container with goodies in it.

Posted

How about placing one really nice hide and leaving the rest of the park for others to hide in? I don't understand why you feel the need to use it all up by yourself.

if you place good quality hides don't worry about taking the park up.folks will not care and will be glad to have some good new hides to find.and since you live close by mait will be easy for you to keep up another plus for folks.

 

I take my 5 yr old grandson with me caching so if you know of some cachers up there with kids make sure you out atleast put out one kids hide it is a park and the parents will be thrilled.with all the micros around it's getting tough to take kids these days

Posted

...would you rather see a fun multi that gets you all over the place or a series of caches in similar places....

 

I'd rather see the series. I've got too many unfinshed multi caches to ever want to mess with them again except in my home town. When I travel I filter them out. Who can say how much time I have and how long a multi will take? A normal cache however I can gage my time and if I can't get them all I can get one or two.

Posted

The problem with multis stems with our society's need for instant gratification and reward. ...

 

True enough. There is a sence of accomplishment with a find. On the mutli's I've done but not finished...I didn't get that accomplishment. Had I found 4 out of 5 caches in the area I'd not regret the 1 missing one. However with a mutli that 1 makes all the difference and there is no 4/5th find to log, it's just a DNF.

Posted (edited)

Just beware of the 0.1 mile distance thing. Most reviewers measure as the crow flies. That means that just because there is a stream/creek/river in the way, you can't have two caches directly across that body of water if the straight line is less than .1 mile (even though it could be 1+ mile to actually walk between the two points. I learned that the hard way.

Sure you can, unless I missed a change in policy just explain (pictures help!) in your listing submission that there's no direct way from A to B that's shorter than .1 mile.

 

As to the multi vs. multiple question, as has been said, in this area quite a lot of cachers skip them.

 

I've been plotting and planning to replicate a corporate caching event we had a few years ago that had 38 stops at historical sites around Birmingham. I would love to make it one big multi but even if I could get it listed that way I don't think many would hunt it... but I'm still werkin on it! :P

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Posted

The problem with multis stems with our society's need for instant gratification and reward. If members are set on having (their find count) >= (find count of the completition)+1 then mutli-caches are a waste of time.

While this is true for some of the cachers out there, it is a somewhat simplistic view of how many, if not most feel.

 

Most cachers I've talked with, or read their comments on the forum, have other reasons to not do a lot of multis.

 

For myself, I learned early in the game not to go for any that do not give some indication of how far they will take you. I have limited mobility, and it is quite disappointing to start on a cache, do the first few stages, then discover the final is beyond my physical abilities.

 

I usually try to figure out if I can do a cache before I go for it. I have found that sometimes I am wrong. I get to where I will start and find it is beyond my ability. If it is a traditional, no real problem, I can just go to the next one. However, I hate to start on a cache, do a couple stages then have to skip the rest of it.

 

For me it has nothing to do with one or ten smileys. It just doesn't feel finished if I don't get to the final.

 

I agree. The mystery of how long it will take and how far I'm expected to travel is what makes multis less attractive for me. My time is limited, I often have to squeeze caching into my schedule. I do appreciate hiders who mention how many stages, and how long (time and distance) they expect the multi to take.

 

The other problem with multis is that they are often hard to complete - a stage is missing or I just can't find one of the stages - like you said, it doesn't feel finished if I don't get to the final. I can't always come back to complete it. So now I only do multis that are close to home so that I can come back if I can't complete it.

Posted
I learned early in the game not to go for any that do not give some indication of how far they will take you.

Can I join you at the cripple's table? :D

Not only are my cripple credentials in order, I'm also old, balding, fat and wear a smelly hat. :)

I like to know an approximate round trip distance, and how many stages there are. :P

Knowing that, I can make a determination regarding my likelihood to locate the final. :santa:

Posted

I like traditionals because I can load them directly into my GPS through a PQ or GPX download.

I don't like entering coords manually and multis require that. Plus the possibility that a stage is missing. And the unknown about how far you need to go, etc.

 

Trads are more appealing to me.

Posted

I have a little 2 stage multi in a small park that gets bypassed all the time while people find other traditional caches in the area and drive right past it! Obviously they are filtering it out. It's ok with me,though, because it has some unique camo that was difficult to make, and will be almost impossible to duplicate. Fewer finders = longer life for the cache :P

 

On the other hand, I have a 3 cache ammo box series in a large wooded area where each cache is a stand-alone. Cachers have to find the first two to get the coords for the final one (half of the coords are in each of the first two). The first two get found often. The last one hardly ever. I guess folks don't read, or don't copy down the coords from the first two.

 

So ... It would seem that if you want lots of traffic to your cache(s) you need to keep them traditionals.

 

Personally, I like them all ... well .... not puzzles.

Posted

Prepare to flame:::::

 

To me, a 5 stage multi cache is like finding 5 traditional and only getting credit for 1. Therefor I do not like them.

 

Now to solve your problem. I love this type of caches series.

 

Do a bunch of traditionals and put part of the coords to a mystery cache in each one. The idea being after they have found all of your traditionals they will now have the coords to your mystery "Bonus" cache.

 

Make sure you list on all the cache pages (traditionals and mystery) where the clues are located.

 

Have fun, and remember to do it anyway you want. Place as many caches in that park as you want, just follow the guidelines.

 

The logs that are left will tell you how cachers feel about the series.

Posted

Prepare to flame:::::

 

To me, a 5 stage multi cache is like finding 5 traditional and only getting credit for 1. Therefor I do not like them.

 

Now to solve your problem. I love this type of caches series.

 

Do a bunch of traditionals and put part of the coords to a mystery cache in each one. The idea being after they have found all of your traditionals they will now have the coords to your mystery "Bonus" cache.

 

Make sure you list on all the cache pages (traditionals and mystery) where the clues are located.

 

Have fun, and remember to do it anyway you want. Place as many caches in that park as you want, just follow the guidelines.

 

The logs that are left will tell you how cachers feel about the series.

 

Burn, baby, BURN!!

 

OK, no flame from me. I agree with you.

Posted
To me, a 5 stage multi cache is like finding 5 traditional and only getting credit for 1. Therefor I do not like them.

No flame proof underwear needed. You like what you like, and you're not afraid to say so.

Kinda refreshing, actually. :laughing:

Posted

I think it's funny that some of the same people saying numbers aren't important also say they don't prefer multicaches. I don't get that... :laughing:

If people cache with kids, they may not be concerned with the numbers, but they still may not like multis because it can be boring for kids finding lots of interim stages and not finding a container with goodies in it.

Delayed gratification is a good lesson to learn early. Wish that I had. :surprise:
Posted

I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned that a multi in a park can inhibit others (particularily cachers that don't like multis) from putting more caches in the park, because they need to figure out where all of the stages are located before they put their own hide out there.

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...