Jump to content

Night cache multi or mystery? Again and again


mucek4

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

I have set up a night cache in a nearby woods. To find it you have to come to marked coordinates and then follow a reflective trail to stage 1. There you will find a micro container where you get coordinates. You go to that coordinates where reflective trail continue. At the end of the second trail you found second micro with coordinates of final location.

 

Now there is a question. I marked a cache as multi, but reviewer sad it's mistery. What do you think?

Link to comment

Hello,

 

I have set up a night cache in a nearby woods. To find it you have to come to marked coordinates and then follow a reflective trail to stage 1. There you will find a micro container where you get coordinates. You go to that coordinates where reflective trail continue. At the end of the second trail you found second micro with coordinates of final location.

 

Now there is a question. I marked a cache as multi, but reviewer sad it's mistery. What do you think?

Seems like a multi to me, but I'm not a reviewer. For me a multi starts at the posted coordinates & has 2 or more stages like your cache does. Not sure why it's mystery.

jrr

Link to comment

I think it's a multi. But I have also seen these type of night caches listed as mysteries. The problem with it listed as a mystery is, that (at least in my country) many people filter mystery caches out in GSAK before a hunt.

Link to comment

Ive seen those types listed as both. In general though, night caches are mysteries.

Just go with what the reviewer says. The icon doesn`t change the cache.

 

As I see guidelines multi has to start at given coordinates. When mistery is places there is nothing at given coordinates.

Usually in multi you get final coordinates on the field. In mistyer you have to get coordinates in webpage.

For those who say it's mistery please say why?

Link to comment

Ive seen those types listed as both. In general though, night caches are mysteries.

Just go with what the reviewer says. The icon doesn`t change the cache.

 

As I see guidelines multi has to start at given coordinates. When mistery is places there is nothing at given coordinates.

Usually in multi you get final coordinates on the field. In mistyer you have to get coordinates in webpage.

For those who say it's mistery please say why?

 

It sounds like a multi to me too. However, I've heard it said before that the mystery/puzzle type is a catch all. Maybe the reviewer is playing it safe and having you list it as such :unsure: .

Link to comment

Since you don't have to do any preparations prior to starting to find the cache at the end it is a multi. Arround here all night caches of the type you describe are listed as a multi cache. I don't see any reason why it should be listed as a mystery (although it always may be listed as a mystery)...

Link to comment

A night cache has special requirements to find, you can't find them (or at least they are not intended to be found) during the day. A multi has no special requirement other than the fact that it is a multi. A multi type cache can be found at any time of day.

Link to comment

I did some investigation

in 250km radious from my house, there are 78 night caches

Multi 54

Mystery 16

Traditional 7

Event 1

 

And yes. This one is possible to find during a day. My GF used 15W LED light and was able to find it.

Edited by mucek4
Link to comment

Ive seen those types listed as both. In general though, night caches are mysteries.

Just go with what the reviewer says. The icon doesn`t change the cache.

 

As I see guidelines multi has to start at given coordinates. When mistery is places there is nothing at given coordinates.

Usually in multi you get final coordinates on the field. In mistyer you have to get coordinates in webpage.

For those who say it's mistery please say why?

 

Mystery is considered the catch all category. Night caches could be listed as either mystery or multi, but are usually mystery here as well. One of the defining tests is whether or not something is at the posted coords, but that isn't the only test. Do your tacks lead to a container with coords to the next stage, or do you use a set of tacks to indicate a turn or change of approach?

If you don't have intermediate stages with containers or some object that provides the coords to the next stage, then it is more of a mystery than a multi.

Link to comment

I've always been under the opinion that a Multi-cache could be found with only a GPS.

No cache page or math needed. No projections or off-sets. GPS leads you to one container where you get coordinates and those coordinates lead you too the next or final stage. If in order to find a cache, you need to do math or number substitution, need the cache page or follow some kind of trail without aid of the GPS, it should be listed as a mystery/puzzle/unknown cache.

 

I'm in the minority of this opinion, but I think this makes it easier for cache finders. Because of the ambiguity in multi caches "rules", I think this makes them the least searched for caches. You'll probably have better results if you list it as a mystery ... at least the local mystery hunters will take note of it. YMMV.

Link to comment

In my area, they are listed both ways...but I think multi-cache is more appropriate unless there are 'special' elements involved. For me (at least) a multi will get the same amount of scrutiny as a mystery before I set off looking for it.

 

If the reviewer INSISTS it be listed as a mystery, you have little choice. If they merely SUGGEST it should be a mystery I would say 'Make it a multi, please'.

Link to comment

I would vote for mystery. A multi has coordinates to the next one at each stop and there waypoints are listed when it is submitted although only the co and reviewer can see then.

 

There is one I ran into in Montana de oro that is listed as a traditional which was pretty annoying after I parked the car and walked to the coordinates and read the description. Wonder how it got past a reviewer

Edited by Walts Hunting
Link to comment

I would vote for mystery. A multi has coordinates to the next one at each stop and there waypoints are listed when it is submitted although only the co and reviewer can see then.

 

There is one I ran into in Montana de oro that is listed as a traditional which was pretty annoying after I parked the car and walked to the coordinates and read the description. Wonder how it got past a reviewer

 

read the OP post again...there's micros hidden with the coordinates to next stage

 

i don't see where the "mystery" is when the coordinates are given to you without performing any calculations etc...

Edited by t4e
Link to comment

What are the other night caches in your area listed as? If they are listed as mystery, then that's how you want yours listed. People that like to do night caches will expect them to be listed that way.

 

Explaned in post #13. This would be second night in my country, the first is listed as "Traditional" :/

Link to comment

Now there is a question. I marked a cache as multi, but reviewer sad it's mistery. What do you think?

 

I would set it up as a multi cache. This is by the way the common choice for such caches in Austria where are tons of night caches. What the knowledge book says might be true for some countries, it is definitely not true for Germany and Austria. I guess that in countries where multi caches with virtual stages are less common and multi cache are rare, the tendency might be larger to use the mystery type for night caches.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

In my area most that I have seen are listed as mystery although I see no reason why they should be. Honestly, if all of the information is presented in the cache listing and there are no puzzels or questions to answer then there is no mystery period. Go to location, follow tacks to cache, simple as that. Should actually be a traditional in my opinion, it's really no different that those caches whose coords take you to a parking lot and the description says "follow hiking trail to the big rock on your left".

 

I did a fire tack trail cache just two days ago that was listed as traditional and there is another one less than a mile away that is also listed as traditional. In your case where your tack trail leads to a container with coords to a second tack trail and then another, it's clearly a multi. Still no mystery since you've presented all of the information up front and finders don't need to do anything but show up and follow your trails.

 

I know others will disagree with me on this one but there are some who will tell you that it needs to be listed as a mystery because not everyone reads the cache listings. Personally I think that's a load of ****. If people choose to look for caches without reading the listing then that is their choice and it shouldn't be your responsibility to categorize it in a way that's more convenient for them to filter out just so they don't have to read the listing. Listing something as a mystery that isn't really a mystery WILL cause your cache to get skipped over by many who would probably have gone for it if listed otherwise. Again, this is just my opinion.

Link to comment
Should actually be a traditional in my opinion, it's really no different that those caches whose coords take you to a parking lot and the description says "follow hiking trail to the big rock on your left".

 

Wow, not sure where your cache area is, but around here that sort of cache would be just begging for a Needs Archived log since it clearly does not meet the definition of a Traditional. One of those would fall into my "I think a Reviewer needs to look at this." bin.

Link to comment
Should actually be a traditional in my opinion, it's really no different that those caches whose coords take you to a parking lot and the description says "follow hiking trail to the big rock on your left".

 

Wow, not sure where your cache area is, but around here that sort of cache would be just begging for a Needs Archived log since it clearly does not meet the definition of a Traditional. One of those would fall into my "I think a Reviewer needs to look at this." bin.

 

I don't know, one of these has been listed for 6 years and has nearly 160 logs and as far as I know no one has complained about it being listed as a traditional.

Link to comment
I don't know, one of these has been listed for 6 years and has nearly 160 logs and as far as I know no one has complained about it being listed as a traditional.

That's why I say it must be a regional thing. Around here, if it wasn't getting NA logs you could bet a number of cachers would be posting corrected coordinates with their logs.

Link to comment

have like 36 night caches in Seattle area that I have been to. 33 of them are listed as puzzles. 2 of them are multis. One up in Vancouver BC is a letterbox.

 

If its just dots or reflectors in the dark, then I would call it a mystery cache.

 

If it contains physical containers which show waypoints to the next one, I would call it a multi.

 

If its a mixture, your guess is as good as mine. I would go with a mystery in that case.

Link to comment

Ive seen those types listed as both. In general though, night caches are mysteries.

Just go with what the reviewer says. The icon doesn`t change the cache.

 

As I see guidelines multi has to start at given coordinates. When mistery is places there is nothing at given coordinates.

Usually in multi you get final coordinates on the field. In mistyer you have to get coordinates in webpage.

For those who say it's mistery please say why?

Does it really say that? Because that's not true at all...

 

Anyway, I would say its an unknown because the coordinates do not take you to another set of coordinates but rather a trail of lights to follow to some coordinates.

 

Unknown is a catch all for pretty much any gray area cache.

Edited by d+n.s
Link to comment

 

For those who say it's mistery please say why?

...

 

Anyway, I would say its an unknown because the coordinates do not take you to another set of coordinates but rather a trail of lights to follow to some coordinates.

 

...

 

This would be my reason as well for calling it a mystery/unknown cache instead of a multi. You say that between the coords posted on the page and the next stage a person needs to follow a fire tack trail. This is what's turning it into a mystery/unknown cache instead of a multi (in my opinion).

Link to comment

I did alot of searches over the internet and in the end I found official Groundspeak site that says:

 

A Multi-Cache ("multiple") involves two or more locations. The final location is a physical container. There are many variations, but most Multi-Caches have a hint to find the second cache, and the second cache has a hint to the third, and so on. An offset cache (where you go to a location and get hints to the actual cache) is considered a Multi-Cache.

 

The "catch-all" of cache types, this form of geocache may involve complicated puzzles that you will first need to solve to determine the coordinates. Mystery/Puzzle Caches often become the staging ground for new and unique geocaches that do not fit in another category.

 

In my case (I hope you agree) a cache involves 2 or more locations and on a location you get hints to the actual cache.

There is no complicated puzzlrs or determening coordinates. However it is a unique geocache in area :)

Link to comment
I did alot of searches over the internet and in the end I found official Groundspeak site that says:

 

A Multi-Cache ("multiple") involves two or more locations. The final location is a physical container. There are many variations, but most Multi-Caches have a hint to find the second cache, and the second cache has a hint to the third, and so on. An offset cache (where you go to a location and get hints to the actual cache) is considered a Multi-Cache.

 

The "catch-all" of cache types, this form of geocache may involve complicated puzzles that you will first need to solve to determine the coordinates. Mystery/Puzzle Caches often become the staging ground for new and unique geocaches that do not fit in another category.

 

In my case (I hope you agree) a cache involves 2 or more locations and on a location you get hints to the actual cache.

There is no complicated puzzlrs or determening coordinates. However it is a unique geocache in area :)

I can see the argument for listing a typical reflector-trail night cache as a multi-cache. And some of the night caches I'm aware of are indeed listed as multi-caches.

 

But the "hints" for a multi-cache are usually objects with coordinates written on them or existing markers from which the cache seeker can produce coordinates using simple substitutions and arithmetic. When seekers need to do more than that to get the coordinates of the next stage, many people think a line has been crossed and the cache should be listed as a mystery/puzzle cache. And using a flashlight to follow a trail of reflectors at night could be considered to be more complicated than using simple substitutions and arithmetic. And most of the night caches I'm aware of (including typical reflector-trail night caches) are listed as mystery/puzzle caches.

Link to comment

Hello

 

Thank you all for your ideas. I just inform you that cache was published with no further questions by my reviewr after I posted 3 reviwer notes with similar explanations as above.

 

p.s. Following trail is more complicated than math? Please.... My 2y old son can follow a trail while he can't calculate 123+543. What is more complicated?

Link to comment

If it was up to me all multies would be...

 

Go to coords

Find next set of coords (actual coords. no math/letter substitution etc etc involved)

Repeat until final is found

 

Basically a string of traditionals, if it involves following tags, finding this headstone and that one then doing math, counting the number of times a letter repeats and ordering them blah blah blah then it should be listed as a mystery cache.

Link to comment
For those who say it's mistery please say why?

I would call it a mystery. Traditionally, with a multi, you arrive at a stage and find coords leading you to another stage. With yours, that doesn't happen. You go to a stage, then follow reflectors to the next stage, where you get coords for the third stage. At stage 3, you don't get coords. Instead, again you follow reflectors to a fourth stage. This fourth stage gives you the coords to the final. If you took the reflectors out of the equation, so it was a simple progression from stage to stage, requiring nothing but punching in coords to stages and following your GPS there, I'd agree it would be a multi.

 

Since that's not the case, it's a mystery.

Link to comment

Traditionally, with a multi, you arrive at a stage and find coords leading you to another stage.

 

That might be the case in your area. In some parts of Europe (e.g. Germany and Austria), the most common type of stage of a multi cache is one where one needs to compute the coordinates of the next stage and there are many other multi-type tasks which in some way describe the way to the next stage without providing coordinates.

Multi caches that can be done without the cache description are almost non-existent in my part of the world.

 

As multi caches and ?-caches together take up up to 50% of the caches in some areas, it is much more important to distinguish between caches that can be done without prior preparation (solving puzzles, finding other caches etc) and those where one can start without preparation than differentiating between the type of tasks that have to be solved throughtout a cache with multiple stages.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

If it was up to me all multies would be...

 

Go to coords

Find next set of coords (actual coords. no math/letter substitution etc etc involved)

Repeat until final is found

 

Basically a string of traditionals, if it involves following tags, finding this headstone and that one then doing math, counting the number of times a letter repeats and ordering them blah blah blah then it should be listed as a mystery cache.

 

For those who say it's mistery please say why?

I would call it a mystery. Traditionally, with a multi, you arrive at a stage and find coords leading you to another stage. With yours, that doesn't happen. You go to a stage, then follow reflectors to the next stage, where you get coords for the third stage. At stage 3, you don't get coords. Instead, again you follow reflectors to a fourth stage. This fourth stage gives you the coords to the final. If you took the reflectors out of the equation, so it was a simple progression from stage to stage, requiring nothing but punching in coords to stages and following your GPS there, I'd agree it would be a multi.

 

Since that's not the case, it's a mystery.

To further simplify.

A multi, like a traditional should require nothing more than a set of coordinates.

 

I had to learn the hard way that puzzles are listed as multies back when I just did the download and go. Kind of irritating to arrive at the coords and start looking for a container or some type of tag with coords for a 1/1 multi and not find a thing only to go back home, read the cache page and see that I had to read a sign skipping 4 to spell out "follow red dots". Then find a tag with coords to the final. I don't seek out multies because to many are on site puzzles and that is just not a multi.

Link to comment

[

To further simplify.

A multi, like a traditional should require nothing more than a set of coordinates.

 

Instead of reserving a full cache type for that sort of multi cache, it would be much more appropriate to introduce a new attribute

"can be done without the cache description". This attribute can also be useful for traditionals as there are traditionals where it is important to read the

description (e.g. to avoid trespassing issues, for security issues etc).

 

BTW; Your concept of a puzzle seems quite broad. I'd find it ridiculous to find a task like write down the second digit of the telephone number of the police

in a puzzles column of a newspaper.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

[

To further simplify.

A multi, like a traditional should require nothing more than a set of coordinates.

 

Instead of reserving a full cache type for that sort of multi cache, it would be much more appropriate to introduce a new attribute

"can be done without the cache description". This attribute can also be useful for traditionals as there are traditionals where it is important to read the

description (e.g. to avoid trespassing issues, for security issues etc).

 

Cezanne

Not true. One would have to read the page to note the attributes.

Then you have:

CO's who don't use attributes.

CO's who use them incorrectly.

CO's who note so many attributes that they have to self determine what the most important ones are because of the limit.

 

Where is the logic in letting a CO should have the option to list a "?" as a multi. Why bother having the multi cache type at all?

 

Nope, my definition for a milti is narrow. Apparently your definition of puzzle is to narrow. I am positive that there is an idgit that has to look up that number to solve the puzzle

Edited by Vater_Araignee
Link to comment

Not true. One would have to read the page to note the attributes.

 

Assuming that one is using PQs to upload the caches to the GPSr (you wrote about uploading), this is not true.

If a cache owner is not using the "can be done without cache description" attribute, not much is happening - the cache

might be ignored cachers with your preferences, but no cacher will go there without the description because he

has evidence that it can be done without description.

 

Where is the logic in letting a CO should have the option to list a "?" as a multi. Why bother having the multi cache type at all?

 

Let's rather put it that way: You have your own definition of multi cache. I can understand why you would like to be able to select just this

type of multi cache, but still the rather fuzzy description of the cache types on gc.com does not prohibit to use multi cache for those multi caches

that form more than 95% of the multi caches in some parts of the world (and believe me, that's a huge number in absolute numbers, many thousands of caches).

 

In your definition, not even simple offset caches would count as multi caches.

 

As I mentioned before, in my area the distinction between ? and multi cache that is important and which warrants both types is that no preparation work is needed for multi caches (so you can just take the description and start off which is not true for ? caches). Look e.g. at my profile:

With the definition you would prefer, among my 582 finds of multi caches more than 550 would be ? finds, ending up in almost no multi caches and

about 900 finds of ? (for comparison, my traditional counter is 951).

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Here in europe (I far as I cached - Slovenia, Austria, Czech Republic) every multi has some sort of calculation. Puzzle or "?" cache means that you have to calculate 1st set of coordinates by yourself and given coordinates are just a reference.

 

For instance.

 

http://coord.info/GCZPDG - A night multi, with about 10 stages - we solve it with a help of google on stage 7 :)

http://coord.info/GC2V5J0 - Clasic multi here (ok long one) You have to count, calculate - no boxes in between - just question to answer

 

http://coord.info/GC2RTMX - Regular (cache is on posted coordinates) but you have to open it. It's like the Da Vinci APPLE

 

http://coord.info/GC2VKZ6 - Mistery - nothing at posted coordinates

http://coord.info/GC2TRCV - Mistery - Even worse. Nothing at coordinates, no text

Link to comment
To further simplify.

A multi, like a traditional should require nothing more than a set of coordinates.

That's kinda my thinking as well, when distinguishing a puzzle from a multi.

With the OP's cache, if I were to show up at 2:00pm, with just my GPSr, I might not be able to find the final. I would have to read the cache page to see I needed to return at night, with a flashlight, in order to complete the cache. The solution is not at the coordinates. Whether stage one is a bison tube holding coords, a metal tag with coords embossed on it, or a plaque with info that can be turned into coords, the answer is physically right there, on most multis I've done. That's kinda what makes me lean toward mystery for that one. The answer is not where the GPSr takes you.

 

BTW; Your concept of a puzzle seems quite broad.

As is Groundspeak's definition of a puzzle cache. It's a catch all. B)

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment
Assuming that one is using PQs to upload the caches to the GPSr (you wrote about uploading), this is not true.
Incorrect, downloading a loc file is not PM only.

The information an LOC provides is.

Cache name

Cache ID#

Coordinates

Cache URL

Difficulty

Terrain

Container

and...

and...

and...

Nope sorry nothing. Meaning no description, hint, attributes or logs included in the download that even basic members can freely acquire.

Let's rather put it that way: You have your own definition of multi cache. I can understand why you would like to be able to select just this type of multi cache, but still the rather fuzzy description of the cache types on gc.com does not prohibit to use multi cache for those multi caches that form more than 95% of the multi caches in some parts of the world (and believe me, that's a huge number in absolute numbers, many thousands of caches).
The amount of incorrectly listed caches due to misinterpretation and error is irrelevant. We are human and can catch errors and rectify them.
In your definition, not even simple offset caches would count as multi caches.
Correct.

Knowing what multi means and what cache means I could be accused of allowing for some interpenetration on what a multi cache is.

Consider: A sticker with a set of coordinates printed on it and applied to the back of a sign is not a cache. A tag with a set of coordinates stamped on it and zip tied to a tree is not a cache.

However the concept allows for those to be included because coord set A leads to coord set B... repeat till final. A simple offset does not work this way and therefor is not a multi.

As I mentioned before, in my area the distinction between ? and multi cache that is important and which warrants both types is that no preparation work is needed for multi caches (so you can just take the description and start off which is not true for ? caches). Look e.g. at my profile:

With the definition you would prefer, among my 582 finds of multi caches more than 550 would be ? finds, ending up in almost no multi caches and

about 900 finds of ? (for comparison, my traditional counter is 951).

Cezanne

And now your stance becomes clear. You are defending you perceived right to your statistics. The concepts of "grandfathering" and "no precedence" mean nothing to you?

Tho I would happily volunteer to spend 6 hours a day reading cache pages and and changing the type to accurately reflect what it is (as long as new submissions where correctly reviewed), I am not suggesting it be done. What I am suggesting is that all non multies be listed by a short methodical definition rather than an individual reviewers interpretation. Doing so would remove confusion.

Link to comment

 

BTW; Your concept of a puzzle seems quite broad.

As is Groundspeak's definition of a puzzle cache. It's a catch all. B)

 

Actually, they also use the terms mystery cache and unknown cache for that category and do not require that a puzzle has to be solved.

In the post I replied to, however, trivial activities (such as computing an offset) have been referred to as having to solve a puzzle and that certainly makes a difference (and I have not yet encountered any Groundspeak source where computing an offset is referred to as solving a puzzle.)

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment
Assuming that one is using PQs to upload the caches to the GPSr (you wrote about uploading), this is not true.
Incorrect, downloading a loc file is not PM only.

 

I wrote PQ, not loc file. If one wants to use the advantages of PM-ship, one needs to pay, quite simple.

 

 

Consider: A sticker with a set of coordinates printed on it and applied to the back of a sign is not a cache. A tag with a set of coordinates stamped on it and zip tied to a tree is not a cache.

However the concept allows for those to be included because coord set A leads to coord set B... repeat till final. A simple offset does not work this way and therefor is not a multi.

 

It depends on whether you associate the word "multi" to container or to stage/location. My understanding of a multi cache is a cache with several stages/locations, not several containers.

Seen in that way, the Groundspeak version which includes offset caches into the multi cache type makes perfect sense.

 

As I mentioned before, in my area the distinction between ? and multi cache that is important and which warrants both types is that no preparation work is needed for multi caches (so you can just take the description and start off which is not true for ? caches). Look e.g. at my profile:

With the definition you would prefer, among my 582 finds of multi caches more than 550 would be ? finds, ending up in almost no multi caches and

about 900 finds of ? (for comparison, my traditional counter is 951).

Cezanne

And now your stance becomes clear. You are defending you perceived right to your statistics. The concepts of "grandfathering" and "no precedence" mean nothing to you?

 

You completely misunderstood my intention. I do not care at all about how my statistics look like. I do care however to be able to distiguish between those caches where I have to

spend hours before being to able to go for them and those where I can spontaneously print the cache description and start off. (And believe me, I am certainly not alone. There will be hardly any cacher in my area of Europe that would like to see multi caches classified in the way you would prefer it. There are many cachers who want to ignore ?-caches, but who like to do the type of multi caches that is not seen as multi cache by you.)

I mentioned my statistics just to give you a feeling that I am not talking about a rarely occuring type of cache.

(Another number: Currently there are about 39000 active multi caches in Germany and more than 42000 mystery caches of which the majority involve puzzles. The number of active traditionals is about 11600 so not so much higher than the added number of caches of the first two types.)

 

 

 

Tho I would happily volunteer to spend 6 hours a day reading cache pages and and changing the type to accurately reflect what it is (as long as new submissions where correctly reviewed), I am not suggesting it be done. What I am suggesting is that all non multies be listed by a short methodical definition rather than an individual reviewers interpretation. Doing so would remove confusion.

 

About 99% of the multi caches that I have visited are classified in the correct way with respect to the current guidelines. Night caches of the type mentioned in this thread might be a borderline case (although I still think that all aspects of the multi cache definition in the guidelines are fulfilled in the night cache example).

In any case, daytime caches where computations have to be done that lead from stage to stage are certainly not even borderline cases.

 

Whether you like it or not caches like my cache

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=0dd78c02-432e-4812-8e59-4f1206770c08

are classified as multi cache in 100% accordance with the guidelines. There are two or more locations involved. The final location is a physical container.

What I am using is not only one of the many variations for multi caches mentioned in the guidelines, but it is the by far most frequent type of multi cache in my region of Europe.

(In Austria about 19% of all caches are multi caches and about 16.5% are ?-caches. In cities these percentages are even higher.)

 

 

A Multi-Cache ("multiple") involves two or more locations. The final location is a physical container. There are many variations, but most Multi-Caches have a hint to find the second cache, and the second cache has a hint to the third, and so on. An offset cache (where you go to a location and get hints to the actual cache) is considered a Multi-Cache.

 

Of course you have the right to prefer a different definition of multi cache than the one Groundspeak is using at the moment, but it is not appropriate to accuse others of choosing the wrong cache type. What I argued above was not about the correct choice of cache types, but rather that your preferred definition for multi cache would be very inconvenient in the part of Europe I live in.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

 

BTW; Your concept of a puzzle seems quite broad.

As is Groundspeak's definition of a puzzle cache. It's a catch all. B)

 

Actually, they also use the terms mystery cache and unknown cache for that category and do not require that a puzzle has to be solved.

In the post I replied to, however, trivial activities have been referred to as having to solve a puzzle and that's certainly makes a difference.

 

Cezanne

The problem is you have to interpret what trivial is.

I can run the pythagorean theorem flawlessly in my my head but I can not memorize basic multiplication.

I can remember a 12 digit IP address that I type three times, months later but I can't remember a telephone number.

Our interpretations of trivial are not the interpretations of everyone else.

Link to comment

Hello,

I am setting up a Zombie Apocalypse or Walking Dead themed multi cache and I was wondering if anybody has any cool and fun ideas. I have 5 stadges, a classic multi cacge, each one a physical container.

 

If you are formilliar with the amc series the Walking Dead that would be cool I could use some of your ideas.

 

Thanks,

gcs317

Link to comment

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...