Can you rate my mystery?

[+Masterofmayhem]

Hi! I've been a lurker here for some weeks now and finally found an excuse to actually join the conversation. The reason being that I just made my first puzzle cache and don't really know how to rate the difficulty. I would thus like people to solve it and then post comments and constructive criticism. When posting, please do not spoil the puzzle, as it has just been released and I wouldn't want anyone to get it too easily. Thank you.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...c8-b9fc66220a0d

Edited August 21, 2010 by Masterofmayhem

[+Lovejoy and Tinker]

Straight forward. But then I have seen a couple of these before, so maybe that makes it easier.

 

Won't spoil it by saying any more but I would imagine most people will sort it out pretty quickly.

 

Maybe a bit more of a description n the text area would help, if you know what I mean, but I can see what you are trying to do. In this case, I think more description would be better.

Like I say, don't want to say too much about what I think would make it better as it will spoil it. PM me if you like.

[+Mezgrman]

Easy one!

I think 2,5 stars would be OK.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Took about 2 minutes to solve. 2.5 sounds right. Unless there are more red herrings...

[+Masterofmayhem]

Ok will edit it a bit to make it less transparent Thanks for your advice.

[+Quossum]

Nice! My favorite type of puzzle, as a matter of fact. The 2.5 seems okay, taking into account the misdirection. I like the title.

 

Finland, eh? Hmm...I have planned excursions centered around a solved puzzle I wanted to grab...

 

--Q

[+Mosaic55]

Well, I've no idea of where to start with it now.

[+Masterofmayhem]

Now that is the reply I was hoping for Apparently it isn't too transparent anymore.

[+holazola]

I agree, 2.5 difficulty is about right. And yes, just the right amount of dis-information on the page now...

[+Lovejoy and Tinker]

That's better

[+power69]

Got the puzzle pretty fast. the hard part is the 6,500 miles i'd have to go to look for it.

i'm always looking for new puzzle ideas.

[+Krux151]

ID say a 5 cause i am HORRIBLE at puzzle caches. This is why i just dont do them, i looked at ur puzzle got a headache and then came back to the forums. But it seems like a good puzzle though

Edited August 22, 2010 by TheGreekSeekers

[+dfx]

easy, i have one just like that, but without the red herring. i rated it as 3.0.

[+Ike 13]

2 Because it's the first place I look when I see a puzzle cache. I do like the red herrings though so a 2.5 would be fair.

[+Ligum]

2.5 seem fair. Usually the second place I look, just after using SELECT ALL to find hidden text on cache page.

[+Mosaic55]

I still don't get it. Somebody email me a clue please?

[+Coldgears]

I suck at puzzles and even I found this waaay to easy.

[+orion X]

I have one sorta like this, but with a much larger red herring and a few extra steps. For sure a 2.0-2.5 though. Keep up the puzzling fun!

[+Harry Dolphin]

Ok will edit it a bit to make it less transparent Thanks for your advice.

 

That was just evil! I like that!!

[+TABjuggler]

So funny story.... I once recited 314 digits of pi off the top of my head for a contest.

 

But I can't figure out why those numbers look familiar...

 

<.<

[+Zwack_&_Irish_Eyes]

Added to my bookmark list of "solved puzzle caches"... One of 14. The only one I will probably never make it to visit though...

 

Z.

[7rxc]

Looks fine to me... took a couple of minutes while I was having my morning coffee (1st cup).

All depends on your experience(s) as do most puzzles... ones you have done are a lot easier than ones you have NOT.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+Krux151]

Really i have no clue is there a hint or something??? does this type of puzzle have a name????

[+Masterofmayhem]

Heh. I'd like to know how many of you guys have *really* studied the 2 pictures included. How many have found the meaning in them? And yes TheGreekSeekers, this might be a hint

[7rxc]

Heh. I'd like to know how many of you guys have *really* studied the 2 pictures included. How many have found the meaning in them? And yes TheGreekSeekers, this might be a hint

 

I did after you mentioned it... long after finding the answer... Question back... did you proof read the solution... that's a long way to go if it's not a typo! Nice looking spot a few blocks away though!

 

Maybe add a checker, so people can try what they find... most puzzles should have one just because.

 

Doug 7rxc

Edited August 23, 2010 by 7rxc

[+mountainman38]

Heh. I'd like to know how many of you guys have *really* studied the 2 pictures included. How many have found the meaning in them? And yes TheGreekSeekers, this might be a hint

 

I did after you mentioned it... long after finding the answer... Question back... did you proof read the solution... that's a long way to go if it's not a typo! Nice looking spot a few blocks away though!

 

Maybe add a checker, so people can try what they find... most puzzles should have one just because.

 

Doug 7rxc

I agree for most puzzles. On this one though, I think it would be a bit silly.

[7rxc]

I agree that it isn't needed for THE answer, it was more for those other tries people might have...

it's more of a IF puzzle then checker present. It might also help confirm the coordinates accuracy, since it would require one more 'version'... we'll see if I was right on that part... although it has been found! We don't know what hints might have been given, but the posted vs solution are quite different... plot them on GE, use ruler... if accurate, they need a warning to that effect...

But it may just be teething problems with a new cache.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+Masterofmayhem]

Woah, didn't notice that one. Thanks a lot 7rxc. I did proofread them but still somehow missed that "slight" difference I am sure people would have understood that to be a mistake, but it was still good that you pointed it out. Now the final coords take you to where they should.

Edited August 24, 2010 by Masterofmayhem

[7rxc]

Woah, didn't notice that one. Thanks a lot 7rxc. I did proofread them but still somehow missed that "slight" difference I am sure people would have understood that to be a mistake, but it was still good that you pointed it out. Now the final coords take you to where they should.

They might understand, but 225 kilometres plus a trip to Finland, and they might wish to show their understanding 'physically', just so you understand their true feelings...

 

Take this from someone who has never placed a cache... (I'm still going to someday) but who looks out for several... There is nothing wrong with having people VET whatever you do... This whole thread is a form of vetting (having someone double check everything by doing it, basically). It's way to easy for the originator to see what he wants to see, NOT what is there! NOW this cache should be good to go.

 

One other suggestion... That other place looked like it may be a viable location, given the limits of GE... it's not close of course, but it may 'desire' a future cache, in memory of this one. Who knows who may work an old copy of the information, or old finals... there was one chap thinking of a trip eventually, he MIGHT not come back for a second look...

edit: You could call that one 'NOT Behind the Curtain'...

Good luck! Doug 7rxc

Edited August 25, 2010 by 7rxc

[+mamoreb]

If anyone has got some spare time... Could you please help with the rating of my first Mystery? http://coord.info/GC2KXNW

[+teamajk]

Got the puzzle pretty fast. the hard part is the 6,500 miles i'd have to go to look for it.

i'm always looking for new puzzle ideas.

 

If you're looking for puzzle ideas, you might like to check out my new blog "Geocaching Puzzle of the Day", which can be found here. The idea is for people who like puzzles to be exposed to lots of different kinds so they can either work on their skills or get inspired for ideas for new hides.

[+teamajk]

If anyone has got some spare time... Could you please help with the rating of my first Mystery? http://coord.info/GC2KXNW

 

This looks clever and well-constructed ... I know WHAT to do, but tangrams are not my specialty, so it may take me a while to actually get it. I'll let you know.

[+teamajk]

If anyone has got some spare time... Could you please help with the rating of my first Mystery? http://coord.info/GC2KXNW

 

This looks clever and well-constructed ... I know WHAT to do, but tangrams are not my specialty, so it may take me a while to actually get it. I'll let you know.

 

I have a solution I'll e-mail you along with my thoughts, and you can let me know how I did. Some type of geochecker is a nice thing to have on a puzzle cache so that people know they've got it solved directly. It is not difficult to add one to your listing. Thanks for the puzzle!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Now that is the reply I was hoping for Apparently it isn't too transparent anymore.

 

This may not have anything to do with your puzzle specifically, but sometimes making a puzzle such that it's difficult to determine where the puzzle actually is makes the difficulty rating harder to define.

 

You've probably come across puzzle caches where can stare for hours without a clue as to where to start, but eventually try something that happens work. I've also come across puzzles which don't seem to provide any sort of clue as to where to start but just happen to guess right on an approach and have it solved in a few minutes.

In both cases, the puzzle might be rated a 3, but the amount of time it takes to solve it seems more based on luck rather then the actual difficulty in obtaining a solution once the puzzle has been identified.

[+power69]

So funny story.... I once recited 314 digits of pi off the top of my head for a contest.

 

But I can't figure out why those numbers look familiar...

 

<.<

001961. . . .

[+mamoreb]

Thanks a lot to teamajk who managed to solve the puzzle and gave useful feedback! I will look into the geochecker thing.

[+teamajk]

Thanks a lot to teamajk who managed to solve the puzzle and gave useful feedback! I will look into the geochecker thing.

 

You're very welcome. There are several checkers to choose from. In the case of "geochecker.com" all you have to do is go to that site and create the checker, and then it will give you html code to paste into your listing. You then need to "edit listing" and insert the link they give you, which should work easily since it looks like your listing is already written in html. I imagine other checkers work about the same way ...

 

If you can get a checker working I'd like to feature the puzzle on my blog, Geocaching Puzzle of the Day. I found it very clever.

Edited January 8, 2011 by teamajk

[+mamoreb]

It's me again... Could you please rate my mystery (http://coord.info/GC33GCW)?

 

It uses a method that I have seen on several other mysterys, but the actual puzzle is more disguised here than on the others that I have seen. There are several clues on the cache page, but those are also disguised.

 

Solving it is not tricky or time-consuming - once you know what to do! Some would immediately see what to do, even before reading the text. Others (i.e. first finders) would struggle for 5+ days. Hard to rate?

Edited November 21, 2011 by mamoreb