cache preference poll

[+CacheStashtic]

I'm fairly new to geocaching, and I was just curious what the cachers of the world consider a "good" cache?

 

Is it all about the actual hide? cleverness of hiding? uniqueness of container used for hide? something else?

 

Do you prefer a good puzzle to solve first? and what makes a good puzzle? difficulty? chance to learn something? perhaps something I've missed?

 

Maybe the multicache is the king, not a one stop smiley for you! But what makes these more special? seeing some interesting places? travel? putting the pieces together? or are you drawn to these for another reason?

 

Or perhaps it's none of these, if a good traditional is put together. What I'm trying to get at here is that I've placed a few in my short time (maybe a few too many, compared to my finds, according to some posts I've read in another thread), and I would like some input from others before I plan my next one. Honestly after posting my latest I realized that all 3 were ultra common lamppost hides and feel pretty unoriginal about it.

 

I'm open to any input, opinion, or constructive criticism any of you might have. And if this type of question has already been posed, feel free to direct me to the proper thread.

[+thedeadpirate]

[+TABjuggler]

To me, multi caches are the poor mans puzzle cache.

 

I would much rather solve a good puzzle and then go find a cache than go to a park and find some arbitrary signs that give me an arbitrary letter to put in for the final coordinates of the multi or mystery, depending on how it is labeled. (I have done a multi and a mystery with those exact same steps and I have no idea what the difference between the two cache types were).

 

Either way, my favorite type of cache is a really well done puzzle that has some kind of coordinate checker on the page. I'm not exactly sure what my idea puzzle type is yet, since my sample size is still low.

 

I enjoy what I call "google puzzles". Basically there are pictures or trivial questions on the page that can be easily answered with a little google research. They take between 30 minutes and an hour and as long as you can check that your answers are correct, they give you a nice satisfaction when you finish.

 

I also enjoy what I call "knowledge puzzles". Basically they require you to have some sort of knowledge about Math, Science, or Engineering to know what direction to even go to START the puzzle. Then after that they still take a fair bit of time to compute.

 

I also just started doing a new type of puzzle that I will call "GPS math" puzzle, that requires you to actually have some working knowledge of what GPS coordinates themselves represent (triangulation, conversions, or other things).

 

What I do not really enjoy so far, are puzzles that have arbitrary ciphers on them. I'm sure that I will grow to like them, but anything that resembles a cryptoquote to me is a really boring puzzle.

 

But to me the puzzle should only be half the fun of my ideal cache.

 

Since I pretty much hate micros and park n' grabs are only good for making yourself feel better (or power caching or a quick stop when you don't have time for a more involved cache) - I much prefer a hike in the woods with a rewarding ammo can at the end.

 

I'm not sure how I feel about terrain yet, since I haven't done too many high terrain caches. I'm guessing that I will love them, but I won't know until I do my first 5/5.

 

As far as containers go, AMMO CANS! They are the most reliable container that I have encountered so far! I love unique as well, but ONLY if they are WATERPROOF. If I open a cache and there is moisture inside, I feel like the CO has failed.

 

So to summerize:

Ammo Can or really unique waterproof container.

That takes me to a really unique location involving some kind of hike (i.e. not a park and grab)

That I only got the coordinates for after solving a fun puzzle of one of the 3 types that I listed above.

That puzzle better have coordinate checking on the cache page though

 

That is my conclusions as I near the 100 cache mark.

Edited July 30, 2010 by TABjuggler

[+CacheStashtic]

NICE!!! Are you saying that I left size out?? Cuz that's a whole other contention about how much that matters...

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Location, location, location! Take me somewhere that I will enjoy being - a nice view, a little-known park, a waterfall you found that few know about, or a city street corner where I can learn something about the place. Choose good locations and the cache is secondary.

 

However, since you asked about cache containers, ammo cans or large containers which contain kid-oriented swag in family-friendly locations are my favorite!

[+CacheStashtic]

To me, multi caches are the poor mans puzzle cache.

 

I would much rather solve a good puzzle and then go find a cache than go to a park and find some arbitrary signs that give me an arbitrary letter to put in for the final coordinates of the multi or mystery, depending on how it is labeled. (I have done a multi and a mystery with those exact same steps and I have no idea what the difference between the two cache types were).

 

Either way, my favorite type of cache is a really well done puzzle that has some kind of coordinate checker on the page. I'm not exactly sure what my idea puzzle type is yet, since my sample size is still low.

 

I enjoy what I call "google puzzles". Basically there are pictures or trivial questions on the page that can be easily answered with a little google research. They take between 30 minutes and an hour and as long as you can check that your answers are correct, they give you a nice satisfaction when you finish.

 

I also enjoy what I call "knowledge puzzles". Basically they require you to have some sort of knowledge about Math, Science, or Engineering to know what direction to even go to START the puzzle. Then after that they still take a fair bit of time to compute.

 

I also just started doing a new type of puzzle that I will call "GPS math" puzzle, that requires you to actually have some working knowledge of what GPS coordinates themselves represent (triangulation, conversions, or other things)...

I was actually thinking about using a triangulation for my next hide!! Your input is truly appreciated! However, as a sidebar, would you formulate a triangulation using separate puzzle caches or as the puzzle itself? (I was thinking about trying to populate a fairly dead map area near me, which is where separate mystery caches would come in)

[+narcissa]

I would much rather solve a good puzzle and then go find a cache than go to a park and find some arbitrary signs that give me an arbitrary letter to put in for the final coordinates of the multi or mystery, depending on how it is labeled. (I have done a multi and a mystery with those exact same steps and I have no idea what the difference between the two cache types were).

 

It sounds like you're describing one particular multi-cache, and not the entire genre.

 

Generally speaking, multi-caches may encompass certain elements that are often similar to some mystery/unknown caches, but it can be done in the field with the instructions and coordinates given on the cache page.

 

I've done some great multi-caches. I particularly enjoy multi-caches that take me to interesting historical locations - it's even better if those locations are somehow connected.

 

Sometimes, a multi-cache can be a great way to take someone on a tour of a town, or a historic site.

 

A multi-cache can also be used to take people to the final cache using a particular route - very useful in nature preserves and other places where it's crucial that people stay on the trail.

 

Around Ottawa, we have many multi-caches that make use of tags. Tags can be cleverly concealed - even more so than cache containers - so these multis can be very challenging.

 

Sometimes a multi is just a good way to bring cachers to a spot where there isn't a good place to hide a cache. It's a decent alternative to the old virtual geocaches.

 

The mystery/unknown category of geocaches also encompasses a large variety of geocaches (many of which are, imho, just miscategorized multi-caches). The reviewers don't seem to be picky about the areas of overlap. I'm not picky either, but I tend to filter out mystery/unknowns when I run pocket queries. I solve mystery/unknowns when I am in the mood for it, and put the final coordinates into my GPS separately.

[+narcissa]

I was actually thinking about using a triangulation for my next hide!! Your input is truly appreciated! However, as a sidebar, would you formulate a triangulation using separate puzzle caches or as the puzzle itself? (I was thinking about trying to populate a fairly dead map area near me, which is where separate mystery caches would come in)

 

Those of you interested in math/engineering geocaches might find the caches of binthair inspiring. Here are a few of my favourite examples of his caches:

 

http://coord.info/GCJ84D

 

http://coord.info/GCD2F3

 

http://coord.info/GCG6TF

[+Prescott Patrol]

This is an interesting question as the Prescott Patrol approaches 100 caches found. I have a few kids from the teens down. I think this depends on the type of person (people) caching. I really like Alabama's answer. But, this is probably because it closely resembles our situation. I have also taken care to place my own cache's with Alabama's guidelines in mind.

[+TABjuggler]

I was actually thinking about using a triangulation for my next hide!! Your input is truly appreciated! However, as a sidebar, would you formulate a triangulation using separate puzzle caches or as the puzzle itself? (I was thinking about trying to populate a fairly dead map area near me, which is where separate mystery caches would come in)

 

There are a couple ways to think about this. There is one that I am working on in my area that is really cool in concept.

 

Basically you are told that a new species of super spiders has invaded the area! (OH NO)

 

There are 3 such caches where "worker" spiders are located. Then there is a final mystery cache where the queen is located and you are told if you kill the queen the workers will not be able to survive and the day will be saved (YAY)

 

I haven't actually gone out to the caches yet to see if a specific distance is specified in those caches, so I have been spending some time learning about coordinates and making some calculations (with half the intention being to learn - not necessarily to find a program to do it for me). I have done the problem about 3 different ways so far, two of which included using programs. The third way I was working on involved using Haversine and not assuming that I am working with just a triangle (it uses spherical geometry).

 

Then you can have them find some sort of center of that triangle (either a centroid, circumcenter, or some arbitrary point specified from distances located in each of the 3 caches).

 

However... you could also do a cache where you list 3 objects or give 3 gps coordinates in some way and tell them explicitly to find the centroid/circumcenter/whatever.

 

Personally, I would really like to see a cache based on 3 points that are far enough away (in different UTM zones) so that you are not able to make basic geometric assumptions.... and would be required to use spherical trigonometry. I'm pretty sure I will make such a cache at some point in the future...

 

So basically you can:

have 3 caches and make the final based off those in some way

use existing information to only hide ONE cache, but still require some sort of triangulation.

 

Hope that helps a little bit. Good luck!

[+thedeadpirate]

NICE!!! Are you saying that I left size out?? Cuz that's a whole other contention about how much that matters...

 

Just wait until everyone wakes up in the morning.

[+TABjuggler]

I would much rather solve a good puzzle and then go find a cache than go to a park and find some arbitrary signs that give me an arbitrary letter to put in for the final coordinates of the multi or mystery, depending on how it is labeled. (I have done a multi and a mystery with those exact same steps and I have no idea what the difference between the two cache types were).

 

It sounds like you're describing one particular multi-cache, and not the entire genre.

 

Generally speaking, multi-caches may encompass certain elements that are often similar to some mystery/unknown caches, but it can be done in the field with the instructions and coordinates given on the cache page.

 

I've done some great multi-caches. I particularly enjoy multi-caches that take me to interesting historical locations - it's even better if those locations are somehow connected.

 

Sometimes, a multi-cache can be a great way to take someone on a tour of a town, or a historic site.

 

A multi-cache can also be used to take people to the final cache using a particular route - very useful in nature preserves and other places where it's crucial that people stay on the trail.

 

Around Ottawa, we have many multi-caches that make use of tags. Tags can be cleverly concealed - even more so than cache containers - so these multis can be very challenging.

 

Sometimes a multi is just a good way to bring cachers to a spot where there isn't a good place to hide a cache. It's a decent alternative to the old virtual geocaches.

 

The mystery/unknown category of geocaches also encompasses a large variety of geocaches (many of which are, imho, just miscategorized multi-caches). The reviewers don't seem to be picky about the areas of overlap. I'm not picky either, but I tend to filter out mystery/unknowns when I run pocket queries. I solve mystery/unknowns when I am in the mood for it, and put the final coordinates into my GPS separately.

 

Yeah, I figured I must be missing something. I have only done two multi-cache so far and one was a lot of fun (hidden by ashnikes). It basically took you to an area where you could then turn your gps off and wander around following clues.

 

Then again, the other one I did just made me run all over my campus and find clues at all my locations and then fill in some information for the next stage.

 

Then I did a mystery cache that took me through a park to do basically the exact same thing as the above.

 

I look forward to changing my opinion about multi-caches as I do more, but for now, I do not prefer them over a good mystery cache.

[+TABjuggler]

I was actually thinking about using a triangulation for my next hide!! Your input is truly appreciated! However, as a sidebar, would you formulate a triangulation using separate puzzle caches or as the puzzle itself? (I was thinking about trying to populate a fairly dead map area near me, which is where separate mystery caches would come in)

 

Those of you interested in math/engineering geocaches might find the caches of binthair inspiring. Here are a few of my favourite examples of his caches:

 

http://coord.info/GCJ84D

 

http://coord.info/GCD2F3

 

http://coord.info/GCG6TF

 

Very Cool! Those seem right up my alley. Interesting caches for sure.

[+CacheStashtic]

TABjuggler you'll have to email me the link to that cache when you get it together. Well beyond my flat mathematical thinking, but exactly the kind of thing this post is about. What kind of caches make you appreciate caching and some ideas to make sure my next one isn't in the base of a light fixture (or at least without appealing to the first part of this sentence first).

[Clan Riffster]

I was actually thinking about using a triangulation for my next hide!

I had one like that. The locals seemed to enjoy it while it lasted. I picked three fairly challenging puzzles, by three different cachers, (with their permission, naturally), many miles apart, and provided the distance, in feet, from the finals of those three, to my cache. Folks had to solve the three puzzles before even starting on mine.

[+TABjuggler]

I was actually thinking about using a triangulation for my next hide!

I had one like that. The locals seemed to enjoy it while it lasted. I picked three fairly challenging puzzles, by three different cachers, (with their permission, naturally), many miles apart, and provided the distance, in feet, from the finals of those three, to my cache. Folks had to solve the three puzzles before even starting on mine.

 

Do you happen to know how far you would need to go to be in a different UTM projection zone?

 

I looked at the cache you are talking about and that looks like it was fun. Those are the kind of mystery caches I really like.

[+Ike 13]

Is it all about the actual hide? cleverness of hiding? uniqueness of container used for hide? Yes that's a factor. A clever hide sticks out from the rest. There is a difference between clever and evil.

 

Do you prefer a good puzzle to solve first? and what makes a good puzzle? difficulty? chance to learn something? Yes, I like puzzles. I prefer to know where or how to start. But love learning new ciphers and encryption methods.

 

Maybe the multicache is the king, not a one stop smiley for you! seeing some interesting places? Multicaches need to take me to amazing places.

 

 

I also enjoy a good hike/walk in a nice natural area. Anytime I get to be by a creek I'm happy. There are many ways to make a cache stand out. This includes a good description.

 

I promised myself never to hide an LPC or guardrail cache. I only have 2 parking lot caches (1 is a common hide, the other is not) The rest are off of trails that give the seeker some time to take in their surroundings while getting to the cache. My tip is to place caches in places you enjoy, and hide it in a way that you would enjoy finding.

[+briansnat]

I'm fairly new to geocaching, and I was just curious what the cachers of the world consider a "good" cache?

 

Is it all about the actual hide? cleverness of hiding? uniqueness of container used for hide? something else?

 

Do you prefer a good puzzle to solve first? and what makes a good puzzle? difficulty? chance to learn something? perhaps something I've missed?

 

Maybe the multicache is the king, not a one stop smiley for you! But what makes these more special? seeing some interesting places? travel? putting the pieces together? or are you drawn to these for another reason?

 

Or perhaps it's none of these, if a good traditional is put together. What I'm trying to get at here is that I've placed a few in my short time (maybe a few too many, compared to my finds, according to some posts I've read in another thread), and I would like some input from others before I plan my next one. Honestly after posting my latest I realized that all 3 were ultra common lamppost hides and feel pretty unoriginal about it.

 

I'm open to any input, opinion, or constructive criticism any of you might have. And if this type of question has already been posed, feel free to direct me to the proper thread.

 

To me it's about the location and/or the adventure reaching it. If the cache is the only reason for visiting that spot, it doesn't interest me.

 

I prefer regular sized caches because I like pawing through the contents and the logbooks actually have logs instead of initials, which can make for interesting reading. I have no issue with micros however, other than the kinds of places most of them are hidden.

 

I enjoy any cache that brings me some place interesting regardless of size.

 

When I place a cache I ask myself why I'm bringing people to that spot. If the cache is the only reason then I find a different spot.

Edited July 30, 2010 by briansnat

[knowschad]

NICE!!! Are you saying that I left size out?? Cuz that's a whole other contention about how much that matters...

 

Try film cannisters vs. ammo cans

[+L0ne.R]

Are you saying that I left size out?? Cuz that's a whole other contention about how much that matters...

 

If you want to win more people over, you'll get more cachers when you go with larger size caches. You'll get all those cachers who don't care about size and will hunt everything plus all those people who filter out micros.