Another challenge cache question...

[+9Key]

First of all, happy holidays and Merry Christmas!

 

On to the question...

 

Challenge caches in my area (the north Dallas 'burbs) have reached the point of "jumping the shark". So many obtuse challenges lately!

 

Anyway, I've been taken to task because I rate my challenge caches based on the terrain and difficulty of the actual hide, not the cumlative D/T of what you have to accomplish to fulfill the requirements of the challenge.

 

Should a challenge cache be rated?

* D/T should consider the caches that need to be found in order to fulfill the requirements

* D/T should consider only the actual hide, not the cumulative of the caches required to complete the challenge

 

What are your thoughts, forum?

[+Ladybug Kids]

First of all, happy holidays and Merry Christmas!

 

On to the question...

 

Challenge caches in my area (the north Dallas 'burbs) have reached the point of "jumping the shark". So many obtuse challenges lately!

 

Anyway, I've been taken to task because I rate my challenge caches based on the terrain and difficulty of the actual hide, not the cumlative D/T of what you have to accomplish to fulfill the requirements of the challenge.

 

Should a challenge cache be rated?

* D/T should consider the caches that need to be found in order to fulfill the requirements

* D/T should consider only the actual hide, not the cumulative of the caches required to complete the challenge

 

What are your thoughts, forum?

I'd never really thought about it before, but since I'm putting together an Alaskan Fizzy (Well-Balanced Cacher) Challenge, I was thinking of rating the Difficulty on the effort it takes to complete the challenge (a la puzzle caches) and Terrain on the actual hide itself.

[+StarBrand]

In theory, the challenge cache itself is but a single cache. Getting to the required challenge caches in order to receive the coordinates of the final may be required but it really isn't a part of the terrain or difficulty of that one final cache.

 

I'd stick to the way you are doing it.

[+9Key]

In theory, the challenge cache itself is but a single cache. Getting to the required challenge caches in order to receive the coordinates of the final may be required but it really isn't a part of the terrain or difficulty of that one final cache.

 

I'd stick to the way you are doing it.

That is the concensus in our local forums but the "numbers cachers" disagree.

They won't hunt a challenge cache with a low D/T. Like I care!

[+niraD]

In theory, terrain could reflect the difficulty of reaching GZ, difficulty could reflect the difficulty of finding the cache once you reach GZ, and some other attribute/rating could reflect other obstacles not covered by terrain and difficulty (e.g., solving a puzzle to get the coordinates, finding the caches needed to meet a challenge, retrieving a container that is easy to find but hard to access).

 

In practice, cache owners either must ignore the "other obstacles", or must somehow incorporate the challenge of the "other obstacles" into the terrain/difficulty ratings.

[+Isonzo Karst]

I like the terrain rating to reflect the actual terrain conditions. I learned this a few years ago, when we'd hiked many many miles finding some caches and built coords for a bonus cache. It was terrain rated 4 based, I guess, on the caches you needed to find to get the coords. We left it unfound, too tired to handle another terrain 4 cache. It was a drive to get back to the area, when we finally did, the actual terrain on the cache was 1.5 - 2.

 

I see the difficulty ratings done both ways - I have no particular opinion on that. I've got 2 challenge caches, I think I've done one each way ;-) whichever voice in my head was loudest at the time.....

[AZcachemeister]

I've seen it done both ways, and neither one is more correct than the other.

 

You could rate it 5/5 (because a 5/5 is necessary to qualify), and state in the description that the actual cache is more like a 2.5/3. (Now that I think about it, however, this seems a bit pretentious. Anyone can make a 5/5 out of a 2.5/3.)

 

Or, you can correctly rate your cache a 2.5/3, and re-state (the obvious) that qualifiers will need to have found a 5/5 to register a find on it.

 

In the final analysis, it's your cache, and you can rate it how you like. The naysayers can attempt airborne intimacy with a rotating pastry if they don't like it.

 

Edited to indicate how many pastries would be needed.

Edited December 24, 2009 by AZcachemeister

[+Cache O'Plenty]

Seems to me that the qualifying caches each would carry their own ratings and the finders will get credit for each of those. The final cache, then should have it's own rating based on it's own D/T.

 

But, I'll ponder any subsequent responses and, perhaps, change my view.

Edited December 24, 2009 by Cache O'Plenty

[+briansnat]

A good argument can be made for either method. I really haven't given this much thought. Perhaps I will light a stogie and crack open an IPA and ponder the subject. Hmmm I think I'll do thgat and get back to you. Now where did I put the matches?

[+The Jester]

Depending on the challenge cache, I look at it like a multi-cache. You don't rate the multi by just the final, especially if there are high D or T stages. The same with a (some) challenge caches (Delorme's, and the like, are different becasue you can choose which caches you do, unlike the History challenges where you have a fixed list).

[+paleolith]

A good argument can be made for either method. I really haven't given this much thought. Perhaps I will light a stogie and crack open an IPA and ponder the subject. Hmmm I think I'll do thgat and get back to you. Now where did I put the matches?

I actually think that an official word would be useful, albeit not in the lifesaving category.

 

Consider three kinds of challenges:

 

1) fizzy grid challenges

2) DeLorme/Thomas/county/etc challenges

3) compilation (fixed list) challenges

 

For fizzy and compilation challenges, you pretty much know the D/T max for the prerequisites. Minor exceptions occur, for example fizzy challenges may include "find any webcam", whose D/T may vary (which could only matter if an incomplete D/T grid is being used), or a compilation challenge may say "find 61 out of 63 on this list", so you can't be sure of the max D/T. But generally you know.

 

And thus it can make sense to rate it either way.

 

For a DeLorme/etc challenge, it is impossible to know the max D/T which the seeker will encounter.

 

This is an argument for rating only the final. It's pretty much necessary for DeLorme/etc challenges, but then by extension it makes sense to rate the other challenges the same way.

 

My two compilation challenges are rated by the max D/T. One allows skipping two caches on the list, so it's rated assuming you skip the most difficult. I also excluded the D rating of one cache because it's misrated.

 

I also clearly state this in the description. Anyone reading the description should know that they aren't looking for a T4 cache when they go for the final.

 

If the guidelines (or even a reviewer consensus) comes out that challenges should be rated based on the final, I'll be happy to change mine. Doesn't matter a lot. I'll just change the description to reflect that. I can see some value in the consistency.

 

Edward

[+DanOCan]

I would say the Difficulty should be rated by the effort needed to qualify for the challenge and the Terrain rated for the actual cache itself.

 

In this case I look at qualifying for the challenge much like a puzzle that needs to be solved before one can find the cache, and almost every puzzle I have seen is rated in such a way that solving the puzzle is included.

[knowschad]

I would look at the D/T rating to see what it would take for me to get the final cache. I'd look at the text of the cache and the required finds to determine the difficulty of the challenge. Two totally different things.

 

 

That said, I wish that challenge caches would go the way of ALRs, but that's just me. I find them to be a pain in the.... but... to each, their own.

[+The Blue Quasar]

I would say the Difficulty should be rated by the effort needed to qualify for the challenge and the Terrain rated for the actual cache itself.

 

In this case I look at qualifying for the challenge much like a puzzle that needs to be solved before one can find the cache, and almost every puzzle I have seen is rated in such a way that solving the puzzle is included.

 

I agree with this cacher 100%

 

BQ

[+wimseyguy]

I think it doesn't really matter which way it is listed as long as the text explains the choice and reveals the true ratings for the challenge cache itself.

[+chrisrayn]

I'd say that two things Must happen...I must be rated based on the ACTUAL Diff/Terr of the final location itself, and it MUST contain the word CHALLENGE in the title.

 

First of all, if "Challenge" is in the title, cachers should at least Expect that this is a challenge cache.

 

Secondly, and this is a more selfish reason, I recently was looking to try to build up my Diff/Terr matrix, and when I searched for a 5/5 I could go after, I found 3. ALL THREE of the caches that were 5/5 were challenge caches. It was actually quite irritating. In fact, one of the challenges was to fill your Matrix up, including a 5/5, and that the cache itself did not count. Kind of high and mighty if you ask me, to claim your cache is a 5/5 and then the final (as listed) was only a 2/1.5. It's not like the hider has done anything to make those other caches difficult.

 

I don't know, that's just how I feel anyways. I DO think, however, that they should be listed under mystery cache types on one of the geocaching.com pages. But, if you really wanted that to happen, 9key, I'm sure you could. I've noticed your name on a few pages at geocaching.com that pretty much say "thanks for the help." :-)

[+paleolith]

I'd say that two things Must happen...I must be rated based on the ACTUAL Diff/Terr of the final location itself, and it MUST contain the word CHALLENGE in the title.

 

First of all, if "Challenge" is in the title, cachers should at least Expect that this is a challenge cache.

I think that's a good idea, but when I submitted my first challenge (a compilation type), the reviewer said that GS doesn't want that type labeled as a challenge. This was not in the guidelines at the time, and despite the changes in that area due to the elimination of ALRs, it still hasn't been clarified. I certainly would like to see GS clarify this, though I don't care a lot which way it goes.

 

Edward