Trail Geocaching

[+river222]

Hi everyone!

 

When I was thinking about new geocaches I had a brainwave of an idea!

 

I don't know if this type exists but to do a type of cache called a trail cache.It's like a cross between a multi and a puzzle.Basically this cache could represent different area of the UK.I live in Manchester so I would probably base one on Manchester.10 Little laminated cards are in 10 different geocaches around Manchester lets say they are all in the M60 ring.What people have to do is search for these laminated cards.The only problem is they won't know which ones.Some clues might be given like what the cache D/T rating is or if it's a traditional or multi cache.They can come across one by pure luck or without even noticing.On each card their is a number and a letter which they will have to record to get the coordinates to the final cache.As I said about 10 laminated cards lets say someone finds card number 3 they will get the number and letter but it will also say what the next cache is so basically it will say the GC code for number 4.They go to number 4 then they go to number 5 and so on.However they will not get information from the cards for number 1 and 2 so they will have to continue searching.Once they have got all the numbers and letters they will create coordinates to the final cache which will be quite a big container!!

 

I don't know if this type of cache is out their so tell me if their is one out their.Also some comments on this type of cache will be great.Thanks,river222

[+Griff Grof]

Hi everyone!

 

When I was thinking about new geocaches I had a brainwave of an idea!

 

I don't know if this type exists but to do a type of cache called a trail cache.It's like a cross between a multi and a puzzle.Basically this cache could represent different area of the UK.I live in Manchester so I would probably base one on Manchester.10 Little laminated cards are in 10 different geocaches around Manchester lets say they are all in the M60 ring.What people have to do is search for these laminated cards.The only problem is they won't know which ones.Some clues might be given like what the cache D/T rating is or if it's a traditional or multi cache.They can come across one by pure luck or without even noticing.On each card their is a number and a letter which they will have to record to get the coordinates to the final cache.As I said about 10 laminated cards lets say someone finds card number 3 they will get the number and letter but it will also say what the next cache is so basically it will say the GC code for number 4.They go to number 4 then they go to number 5 and so on.However they will not get information from the cards for number 1 and 2 so they will have to continue searching.Once they have got all the numbers and letters they will create coordinates to the final cache which will be quite a big container!!

 

I don't know if this type of cache is out their so tell me if their is one out their.Also some comments on this type of cache will be great.Thanks,river222

 

That's a great idea actually But would it be popular enough for lots of people to hide one around the world, or is it better just for a one off cache under a Multi? Maybe suggest it to Groundspeak, I like the idea a lot

[I!]

You could do it today as a mystery/unknown/puzzle (will they ever decide on the nomenclature!) cache type. Personally, I don't find it an attractive concept: it's less trail, more trial (and error), as the would-be finder waits for dumb luck or the grapevine to reveal the coordinates of the first card in the series.

[+river222]

You could do it today as a mystery/unknown/puzzle (will they ever decide on the nomenclature!) cache type. Personally, I don't find it an attractive concept: it's less trail, more trial (and error), as the would-be finder waits for dumb luck or the grapevine to reveal the coordinates of the first card in the series.

 

But it does give clues to the caches itself.Say for example the cache is a small container and the D/T rating is 3/1 dosn't it eliminate most caches in the area?Also people might enjoy doing it as it will obviously mean more cache finds?

[team tisri]

Hi everyone!

 

When I was thinking about new geocaches I had a brainwave of an idea!

 

I don't know if this type exists but to do a type of cache called a trail cache.It's like a cross between a multi and a puzzle.Basically this cache could represent different area of the UK.I live in Manchester so I would probably base one on Manchester.10 Little laminated cards are in 10 different geocaches around Manchester lets say they are all in the M60 ring.What people have to do is search for these laminated cards.The only problem is they won't know which ones.Some clues might be given like what the cache D/T rating is or if it's a traditional or multi cache.They can come across one by pure luck or without even noticing.On each card their is a number and a letter which they will have to record to get the coordinates to the final cache.As I said about 10 laminated cards lets say someone finds card number 3 they will get the number and letter but it will also say what the next cache is so basically it will say the GC code for number 4.They go to number 4 then they go to number 5 and so on.However they will not get information from the cards for number 1 and 2 so they will have to continue searching.Once they have got all the numbers and letters they will create coordinates to the final cache which will be quite a big container!!

 

I don't know if this type of cache is out their so tell me if their is one out their.Also some comments on this type of cache will be great.Thanks,river222

 

It sounds loosely similar to the idea of having travel bugs that carry pieces of information around and if you find the bugs you can piece together the coordinates of the final cache.

[+river222]

Hi everyone!

 

When I was thinking about new geocaches I had a brainwave of an idea!

 

I don't know if this type exists but to do a type of cache called a trail cache.It's like a cross between a multi and a puzzle.Basically this cache could represent different area of the UK.I live in Manchester so I would probably base one on Manchester.10 Little laminated cards are in 10 different geocaches around Manchester lets say they are all in the M60 ring.What people have to do is search for these laminated cards.The only problem is they won't know which ones.Some clues might be given like what the cache D/T rating is or if it's a traditional or multi cache.They can come across one by pure luck or without even noticing.On each card their is a number and a letter which they will have to record to get the coordinates to the final cache.As I said about 10 laminated cards lets say someone finds card number 3 they will get the number and letter but it will also say what the next cache is so basically it will say the GC code for number 4.They go to number 4 then they go to number 5 and so on.However they will not get information from the cards for number 1 and 2 so they will have to continue searching.Once they have got all the numbers and letters they will create coordinates to the final cache which will be quite a big container!!

 

I don't know if this type of cache is out their so tell me if their is one out their.Also some comments on this type of cache will be great.Thanks,river222

 

It sounds loosely similar to the idea of having travel bugs that carry pieces of information around and if you find the bugs you can piece together the coordinates of the final cache.

 

Travel bugs are very common for going missing and they cost a lot of money so that's why a container is usually better.Also if the container goes missing a simple change of the laminated card and the cache would make the trail work!

[I!]

But it does give clues to the caches itself.Say for example the cache is a small container and the D/T rating is 3/1 dosn't it eliminate most caches in the area?Also people might enjoy doing it as it will obviously mean more cache finds?

Hmm, still no thanks; but I don't think anyone's lack of enthusiasm on this forum is going to put you off

 

I suggest you just go for it and see how it turns out.

[+dartymoor]

There's a series called "Somewhere on Dartmoor" which has the coordinates of each cache hidden on a TB. As pointed out, it's kind of similar.

 

Yes they go missing, but so do bits of cards in caches, and with some caches being full of geolitter how would you make them stand out? And if they're untracked, how do you know when they've gone missing?

[+Griff Grof]

There's a series called "Somewhere on Dartmoor" which has the coordinates of each cache hidden on a TB. As pointed out, it's kind of similar.

 

Yes they go missing, but so do bits of cards in caches, and with some caches being full of geolitter how would you make them stand out? And if they're untracked, how do you know when they've gone missing?

 

Well, perhaps sticking the card to the lid of the cache, then there's no problem?

[team tisri]

Hi everyone!

 

When I was thinking about new geocaches I had a brainwave of an idea!

 

I don't know if this type exists but to do a type of cache called a trail cache.It's like a cross between a multi and a puzzle.Basically this cache could represent different area of the UK.I live in Manchester so I would probably base one on Manchester.10 Little laminated cards are in 10 different geocaches around Manchester lets say they are all in the M60 ring.What people have to do is search for these laminated cards.The only problem is they won't know which ones.Some clues might be given like what the cache D/T rating is or if it's a traditional or multi cache.They can come across one by pure luck or without even noticing.On each card their is a number and a letter which they will have to record to get the coordinates to the final cache.As I said about 10 laminated cards lets say someone finds card number 3 they will get the number and letter but it will also say what the next cache is so basically it will say the GC code for number 4.They go to number 4 then they go to number 5 and so on.However they will not get information from the cards for number 1 and 2 so they will have to continue searching.Once they have got all the numbers and letters they will create coordinates to the final cache which will be quite a big container!!

 

I don't know if this type of cache is out their so tell me if their is one out their.Also some comments on this type of cache will be great.Thanks,river222

 

It sounds loosely similar to the idea of having travel bugs that carry pieces of information around and if you find the bugs you can piece together the coordinates of the final cache.

 

Travel bugs are very common for going missing and they cost a lot of money so that's why a container is usually better.Also if the container goes missing a simple change of the laminated card and the cache would make the trail work!

 

I wouldn't say they cost a lot of money, an unactivated TB can be as little as £4. By the time you've fussed with preparing a new box (assuming you're [edit: not] using those flimsy boxes from Chinese takeaways) and produced and laminated a card the cost of the components and your time is accumulating. Also a TB can travel, so you have to hunt it down to get the information from it.

Edited August 29, 2012 by team tisri

[+Ant89]

sounds like an unknown cache type. (and I considered doing this some time ago)

If YOU dont OWN the caches the cards are going in (stickers might be better) then ask the owners permission before placing the clues in their caches. If your going to do multiple caches with the same idea then ensure each card/sticker states the GC code of the cache it leads to in order to prevent confusion.

[+redsox_mark]

An interesting idea, which could be done as a puzzle/unknown cache. It's slightly different than using a TB, as TBs travel and these cards will not.

 

I assume the cards would go inside caches not owned by the owner of the final cache - otherwise finders would only need to check caches by the one owner. (Unless the owner has lots of caches, then I guess it could work).

[team tisri]

sounds like an unknown cache type. (and I considered doing this some time ago)

If YOU dont OWN the caches the cards are going in (stickers might be better) then ask the owners permission before placing the clues in their caches. If your going to do multiple caches with the same idea then ensure each card/sticker states the GC code of the cache it leads to in order to prevent confusion.

 

This is a good point, if you're using someone else's cache to host your card/sticker/whatever you'll need a fallback plan in case the cache gets archived. That might just be another cache to host a replacement sticker, it might be a degree of redundancy, but it would be a shame if your cache was no longer available because someone else's cache wasn't maintained.

[+abanazar]

You'd probably want to run these parasitic stages past a Reviewer too before going too far. (Hmmm, parasitic puzzle type - it has a nice ring to it!)

 

I think the officially correct waypoint type for your feeder sites would be "Stages of a Multicache (visible to you and reviewer)" (it's not a virtual Question to Answer stage as you are physically placing information there). I can then imagine the Reviewer tools' "proximity to other caches" alarms going off. Silly in this context, but I can imagine it happening and it would be better to anticipate it before doing too much planning.

 

On the other hand, the same restriction doesn't appear to apply to a CO's own trail + bonus series, where the puzzle/unknown bonus should strictly have "Stages of a Multicache" waypoints on the feeder caches - it is physical information that has been placed by the CO of the bonus, after all. Perhaps all such bonus caches contravene the guidelines?

 

I'd be interested in an explanation there (either where my reasoning has gone wrong, or which sub-paragraph of the guidelines allows it). If it's OK to place physical clues without declaring them as Stages of a Multicache, I'd also like to know that.

[team tisri]

You'd probably want to run these parasitic stages past a Reviewer too before going too far. (Hmmm, parasitic puzzle type - it has a nice ring to it!)

 

I think the officially correct waypoint type for your feeder sites would be "Stages of a Multicache (visible to you and reviewer)" (it's not a virtual Question to Answer stage as you are physically placing information there). I can then imagine the Reviewer tools' "proximity to other caches" alarms going off. Silly in this context, but I can imagine it happening and it would be better to anticipate it before doing too much planning.

 

On the other hand, the same restriction doesn't appear to apply to a CO's own trail + bonus series, where the puzzle/unknown bonus should strictly have "Stages of a Multicache" waypoints on the feeder caches - it is physical information that has been placed by the CO of the bonus, after all. Perhaps all such bonus caches contravene the guidelines?

 

I'd be interested in an explanation there (either where my reasoning has gone wrong, or which sub-paragraph of the guidelines allows it). If it's OK to place physical clues without declaring them as Stages of a Multicache, I'd also like to know that.

 

I'd have thought it would be a "question to answer" on the basis the question would be nothing more than "what's the number on the card" - it's not a physical stage of a multicache as it isn't a physical box in its own right.

 

If a few local cache owners were agreeable it might be interesting to create the cards to put in caches and have them moving from cache to cache but within a loosely defined area. Otherwise the final cache becomes little more than a multi where other people set all the individual stages, and you end up with something that's loosely like a travel bug but without even the modest expense of releasing TBs.

 

Alternatively if the cards were trackable you could buy a few TBs, print the tracking codes on the cards, and then if a card ended up leaving the area or going missing you could just print another one with the same tracking code and release it again, much like people use the duplicate TB tag if the original goes missing.

[+abanazar]

I'd have thought it would be a "question to answer" on the basis the question would be nothing more than "what's the number on the card" - it's not a physical stage of a multicache as it isn't a physical box in its own right.

The guidelines say:

 

7. Physical elements of different geocaches should be at least 0.10 miles (528 ft or 161 m) apart A physical stage is defined as any waypoint that contains a physical element placed by the cache owner, such as a container or a tag with the next set of coordinates. Non-physical caches or stages, including reference points, trail-head/parking coordinates and/or a question to answer waypoints, are exempt from this guideline.

 

This card is a physical element placed by the CO of the final, just like a tag on a tree. The TB method is a different mechanism that is not subject to proximity.

[+redsox_mark]

You'd probably want to run these parasitic stages past a Reviewer too before going too far. (Hmmm, parasitic puzzle type - it has a nice ring to it!)

 

I think the officially correct waypoint type for your feeder sites would be "Stages of a Multicache (visible to you and reviewer)" (it's not a virtual Question to Answer stage as you are physically placing information there). I can then imagine the Reviewer tools' "proximity to other caches" alarms going off. Silly in this context, but I can imagine it happening and it would be better to anticipate it before doing too much planning.

 

On the other hand, the same restriction doesn't appear to apply to a CO's own trail + bonus series, where the puzzle/unknown bonus should strictly have "Stages of a Multicache" waypoints on the feeder caches - it is physical information that has been placed by the CO of the bonus, after all. Perhaps all such bonus caches contravene the guidelines?

 

I'd be interested in an explanation there (either where my reasoning has gone wrong, or which sub-paragraph of the guidelines allows it). If it's OK to place physical clues without declaring them as Stages of a Multicache, I'd also like to know that.

 

An interesting question.

 

With a typical "bonus cache" (where collecting clues in a cache series allows you to find an additional bonus cache): These don't use additional waypoints at all. I see the logic in this way: The puzzle (bonus) is solved by finding other caches - but the other caches are not stages for the bonus. (Though I understand the logic which says maybe they should be).

 

With the parasite, would it be any different? The only difference is the "host" caches are altered (by the inclusion of the cards) to create the puzzle. Clearly if one listed each host cache as "States of a Multicache" then that would raise the proximity alarm.

[+redsox_mark]

If a few local cache owners were agreeable it might be interesting to create the cards to put in caches and have them moving from cache to cache but within a loosely defined area. Otherwise the final cache becomes little more than a multi where other people set all the individual stages, and you end up with something that's loosely like a travel bug but without even the modest expense of releasing TBs.

 

If the cards move, it would be similar to Wombles Signature cache. In this case I don't think it would be necessary (or practical) to get agreement from all cache owners in the area.

[team tisri]

I'd have thought it would be a "question to answer" on the basis the question would be nothing more than "what's the number on the card" - it's not a physical stage of a multicache as it isn't a physical box in its own right.

The guidelines say:

 

7. Physical elements of different geocaches should be at least 0.10 miles (528 ft or 161 m) apart A physical stage is defined as any waypoint that contains a physical element placed by the cache owner, such as a container or a tag with the next set of coordinates. Non-physical caches or stages, including reference points, trail-head/parking coordinates and/or a question to answer waypoints, are exempt from this guideline.

 

This card is a physical element placed by the CO of the final, just like a tag on a tree. The TB method is a different mechanism that is not subject to proximity.

 

I'd say the card is not a physical element in that it isn't a cache in its own right any more than a lamppost with a nice prominent number painted on it is a cache. The proximity issue is to avoid the situation where someone looking for one cache finds a different cache - if you've put a card in someone else's cache there's still only one physical container at the stage.

 

If you wanted to place your own physical container (e.g. a film pot with a clue number, or the coords for the next stage) you'd have to abide by the proximity rules.

 

I suspect in the guidelines "placing tags" is intended to mean hiding something as an independent entity rather than placing a card inside an existing cache. It seems to me that the question "what number is on the lamp post, this is C" is no different to "what number is on the card inside this other cache, this is C".

 

Maybe a friendly reviewer will let us know one way or the other.

[team tisri]

If a few local cache owners were agreeable it might be interesting to create the cards to put in caches and have them moving from cache to cache but within a loosely defined area. Otherwise the final cache becomes little more than a multi where other people set all the individual stages, and you end up with something that's loosely like a travel bug but without even the modest expense of releasing TBs.

 

If the cards move, it would be similar to Wombles Signature cache. In this case I don't think it would be necessary (or practical) to get agreement from all cache owners in the area.

 

Looks like it. If you've got moving cards they'd work like TBs and it's hard to see how anyone could expect to be asked permission for their cache to host a card, any more than anyone asks permission to drop a TB in a cache.