Would it be fun/wrong/against a rule/other....

[+Lonemorf]

I think I have managed to create a somewhat tricky cache to find, but I wanted to make it a little "different".

Would it be daft/silly to put "decoy" caches in the "most likely" places for a cache, and in/on those caches put fun messages "close, but keep looking", or "Did you really think we would make it this easy" etc etc - the actual location is going to be, I hope, somewhat unique!

 

Would you be irritated or amused?

 

Any thoughts appreciated/welcome/

 

Cheers

 

J

[+Ranger Roo]

Amused I reckon - have seen one a bit like this before - there were bits of wood with frown faces under obvious stickflage...

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Not new...

But regardless of what "we" think, it's the folks that hunt for your cache that will probably log it even though they didn't actually find it; simply leave in a P-O'ed state of mind; simply leave taking the decoy(s) with 'em; or perhaps just conjure up a name of their own liking for the hider of such.

 

So... you get to decide if you will delete the logs of those who didn't find the "real" cache. If you do, you'll make enemies, if you don't, then what is the point of the decoys?

 

Do keep in mind that if your coordinates are accurate, decoys are next to useless -- or they soon would be non-existent.

 

To use less-than-accurate coordinates, now... that is a different matter. A bad matter, and folks will probably tell you such.

 

Raising the level of difficulty due to camouflage or a good hide is one thing, raising the level of difficulty due to misdirection is... well, you get the point.

[+Lonemorf]

I hear you Gitchee - I was thinking of the decoys being within 4ft of the hide.....I mean *real* close.

 

Although only 2 replies, I think there will be a divided audience on this...........

 

EDIT: Love the frowning wood - now thats funny.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Lonemorf

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Although only 2 replies, I think there will be a divided audience on this...........

There is ALWAYS divided responses here... as it should be.

[+unabowler]

I've seen at least three caches like this. The dummy cache had a note in it saying to keep looking. It was cool enough but I've only ever signed 1 of the 3 logs.

[+Bear and Ragged]

So, someone finds a dummy with no log.

Puts in a log for the 'missing' one, and signs and logs as found.

 

Next cacher finds it.

Signs the log and counts it as a Found it...

[+Lonemorf]

Hehe, Too true Gitchee

 

I've seen at least three caches like this. The dummy cache had a note in it saying to keep looking. It was cool enough but I've only ever signed 1 of the 3 logs.

 

There wouldnt be logs in the decoys if I were to do it - just a laminate paper making it obvious it was not the cache.

 

Its already sounding too much like hard work

[+kunarion]

Would it be daft/silly to put "decoy" caches in the "most likely" places for a cache, and in/on those caches put fun messages "close, but keep looking", or "Did you really think we would make it this easy" etc

When I asked the county park manager if I could place a cache, he told me that one of his ideas would be to have a cache on a string under a loose fence post cap. So I put a decoy near my cache, at the nearby chain link fence, under a fence post cap . It's a "red herring" . At one point, I had at least four decoys. One was a laminated "red herring" under a rock. I thought that if cachers read the description and the hint, and follow the coords, they won't be anywhere near the fence nor the rock, so they can't get annoyed, because they won't "find" a decoy. Well, several people found at least the fence post decoy.

 

Anyway, "decoy" items throw people off their game, so use decoys wisely.

 

Here's what's on my red herring key fob in the fence:

 

Edited August 25, 2013 by kunarion

[+Walts Hunting]

Done a couple like that and thought it was kind of funny. As to original good luck with that. All has been done.

[+unabowler]

Hehe, Too true Gitchee

 

I've seen at least three caches like this. The dummy cache had a note in it saying to keep looking. It was cool enough but I've only ever signed 1 of the 3 logs.

 

There wouldnt be logs in the decoys if I were to do it - just a laminate paper making it obvious it was not the cache.

 

Its already sounding too much like hard work

 

What I meant was I only ever found the real cache on 1 of the 3 caches. There weren't logs in the decoys, only notes (one of them was laminated I think) saying something to the effect that this decoy wasn't the cache.

 

This was one, months later it still has no finds.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC411H9_ocra-i-saw-sasquotter

[+T.D.M.22]

 

Do keep in mind that if your coordinates are accurate, decoys are next to useless -- or they soon would be non-existent.

 

To use less-than-accurate coordinates, now... that is a different matter. A bad matter, and folks will probably tell you such.

 

 

I think what you meant was, putting it as a traditional cache, then spot-on co-ords would defeat the purpose of a decoy. I do have a cache with 2 decoys(Pictures of a fake duck..get it? Decoy...)

 

Anyway I listed it a an unknown with instructions to go to the posted co-ords and search in the obvious places. I do have co-ords for all both the cache and the decoys, and I also mention it on the cache page. But then again with an unknown cache, you generally get less finders.

 

On a side note I've always wanted to put a cache into a duck or goose decoy, and warn the finders that there may be decoys at GZ

[+Chief301]

I've found one like that and we laughed our butts off. It has earned several Fave points as well. 4 or 5 decoys, I don't remember exactly, all on one lamp post. Funny 😉

[+Quossum]

The best one I've seen like this had you head to the usual lamp skirt. Picked it up, found the film can...and in the film can was a note saying something like, "Look up!" The actual cache was a nano stuck way up high on the lamp post. It gave us a chuckle and really "elevated" the typical LPC. So I think this would be a fun idea, so long as the "real" cache wasn't all TOO diabolical.

 

--Q

[+Grasmere Duo]

My friend hid one like that in NH, during the winter. The final, and some decoys, are in a rock outcropping. In the woods the GPSr reception can be unreliable so combined with his coords (first year of finds and hides were with a car nuvi) and the tons of snow, it was difficult before his coords were corrected by about 100'. He was smart to wait until a fresh snowfall to have it published to cover up tracks and the hide. If you read the first dozen logs, you will see the difficulty and frustration. But the finders liked it and gave it fav points.

 

GC3AXDG Got it! Not it!

[4wheelin_fool]

I've hidden 2 like that. Every film can gave a clue with distance and direction, except for one in each case that said it wasn't hidden in a film can. In both cases someone removed all of the decoys.

[+JohnCNA]

I have found a couple caches that had decoys nearby. I thought it was pretty funny. One of them had someone find the decoy and post a "missing log" and then added a log and signed as found. The CO eventually added a card in the decoys to give more explanation and to remind finders not to add a log an keep looking.

[+ipodguy]

I've done at least three like that. It's kinda fun.

[+ngrrfan]

IMHO... the accidental decoy, tobacco tin when I should be looking for a pill bottle or matchstick container, is more fun to find than an actual decoyed cache.

[+dprovan]

I'm glad you asked, 'cuz I've formed some definite opinions on it. In general, when I run into decoys, I find them annoying. The really annoying ones are the decoys that are actually clever hides in their own right; it's one thing to get caught looking under the skirt for a D3 hide and having your hand slapped by a decoy, but it's something else entirely to searched very carefully, find a very good hide, and then discover you wasted all that effort on a decoy.

 

I've seen two things that have made decoys work. One is good humor. I'm less likely to be annoyed if the cache is making a joke that I feel in on. (Not so good if I feel a joke's being played on me.) One of the first decoy caches I ran into was called something like Decoy Duck, and it turned out to be 4 decoys and a cache hanging in a tree. I imagine I found this funny largely because the first one I grabbed was the cache, before I even noticed that there were others which I had actually ducked under while I was grabbing the real cache.

 

The other thing I've seen that makes decoys OK is if the decoys provide hints. If the decoy just laughs at me, that's annoying. Be if the decoy tries to be helpful, I feel like I'm still making progress and I haven't wasted my time finding and opening the decoy.

[+briansnat]

I think I have managed to create a somewhat tricky cache to find, but I wanted to make it a little "different".

Would it be daft/silly to put "decoy" caches in the "most likely" places for a cache, and in/on those caches put fun messages "close, but keep looking", or "Did you really think we would make it this easy" etc etc - the actual location is going to be, I hope, somewhat unique!

 

Would you be irritated or amused?

 

Any thoughts appreciated/welcome/

 

Cheers

 

J

I've been both irritated and amused when I've encountered these. If the hide is hard to begin with and it's just a "keep looking" thing I'm not usually amused. I found one a few weeks ago where there were decoys. The hide was was one that took a bit of searching, but wasn't crazy difficult and the decoys provided better clues. I thought that was cute.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I've done a few. I found them humorous. "Nope. Try again." Aargh!

Since satellite coords are only good for 20' or so, it gives plenty of opportunity to hide decoys. (Best one was under a fencepost. Tricky hide.)

Then again, I found an ammo can with thirty (or so) film canisters. One had the log book. A fair number of people signed the "Nope. This isn't it" note.

I never found them irritating. (Well. Except for the one where I never found the actual cache.)

[AZcachemeister]

Possibly our most creative local (urban cache) hider often uses decoys.

None of the caches that have them are crazy difficult, but the decoys do tend to prey on any pre-conception you may have had about the actual hide.

More than a few times I found the actual cache straightaway, and logged 'there was a decoy?'.

 

Knowing the difference between 'mean' and 'funny' is the key.

[+Mudfrog]

Hehe, Too true Gitchee

 

I've seen at least three caches like this. The dummy cache had a note in it saying to keep looking. It was cool enough but I've only ever signed 1 of the 3 logs.

 

There wouldnt be logs in the decoys if I were to do it - just a laminate paper making it obvious it was not the cache.

 

Its already sounding too much like hard work

 

But it's not! I've found a couple or three and enjoyed the heck out of them. I even placed one which has about 6 decoys. What i did with mine was to list the cache as regular, which it is. The decoys are all micros. This in itself helps finders to realize that the decoys are what they are. They have the typical "not this one", "try again" notes inside. That cache has been out since 2003 and has never gotten messed up by other cachers. Now that i think about it, i don't think it's ever had any problems.

 

Rayburn Riches

 

It's away from the city so doesn't get logged too often but the logs that are there are positive.

[+niraD]

There wouldnt be logs in the decoys if I were to do it - just a laminate paper making it obvious it was not the cache.

I've seen decoys like that acquire "replacement" logs, and then later finders sign the "replacement" log, never reading the laminated paper (assuming that it's a standard cache note).

 

If possible, use non-containers as your decoys. A film canister can acquire a "replacement" log, no matter what the laminated paper inside it says. A 2-inch length of dowel painted grey and black is much less likely to acquire a "replacement" log.

[+BlueDeuce]

 

Any thoughts appreciated/welcome/

 

Cheers

 

J

 

It's certainly no worse than searching through a giant pile of rocks. Go for it.

 

On a personal note, if you keep me searching at the back of a stuffmart I'll probably pass on it. But that's just me.

[+BlueDeuce]

I've found one like that and we laughed our butts off. It has earned several Fave points as well. 4 or 5 decoys, I don't remember exactly, all on one lamp post. Funny 😉

 

There's a local cache that has like seven containers attached to a board. It's a fun game to not have the last container chosen be the real cache.

[+Fridge01]

Decoy hides can be fun if they're not hard. But if they are too evil you may cause more irritation than enjoyment. The worst I ever saw was described as "under a stone", there were many stones on the ground and the cache was 15 feet up a tree under a well-placed stone. and it didn't have a high difficulty rating.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Fridge01

[+Ben0w]

Generally I don't like beeing fooled. If the decoy has a certain reasoning, than it would be OK, but depends.

 

I heard of a cache in an abandoned railroad tunnel. There is a decoy with a hint to look somewhat deeper at the coordinates position on the top of the hill. This IS helpful and fun, since everyone has the chance to read the listing and not climb the hill. Some do and obviously need the additional hint there.

[+Lonemorf]

Oky doke - thanks all.

I think I have enough to work out what to do here. Gonna have a ponder, and get the cache out there first, and see how it goes.

[+redwoodkestrel]

I'm not a huge fan of decoys, mainly because most of the ones I've seen have just had a slip of paper inside with "Not it" or "Decoy" written on one side of it... and then a whole bunch of logs on the other side of it! Many cachers will see that someone else has signed that slip of paper and just assume they've found the cache and will sign it as well - especially if it's not explicitly clear on the cache page that there are decoys (and even then, since many folks don't read the cache description).

 

I'd say to make it well-done, you should have a laminated card (it's much harder to think a laminated card is a logbook - though I've seen it happen!) inside, marked on both sides, clearly showing that this is a decoy. And mention the decoys both in the cache description, and in the cache hint. With all that in place, I'd guess you'll be less likely to have people log the decoy as the cache.

[+MI_CO]

I have done two like this, and was amused both times, but wouldn't like the novelty to catch on and start seeing a lot of them. One was a puzzle cache, and seems like a lot of cachers calculated wrong. The owner put a cache in the wrong location with a note saying 'Try again' and a hint.

 

The other was a skirt lifter with about a dozen 'fakes' with the actual being a magnetic nano.

[+bflentje]

I have done two like this, and was amused both times, but wouldn't like the novelty to catch on and start seeing a lot of them. One was a puzzle cache, and seems like a lot of cachers calculated wrong. The owner put a cache in the wrong location with a note saying 'Try again' and a hint.

 

The other was a skirt lifter with about a dozen 'fakes' with the actual being a magnetic nano.

 

Yep, I've seen it several times and it was only cute the first couple times. Kind of like LPC's.

[+Understandblue]

I've found three with decoys. Two I thought were very clever and it definitely added to my enjoyment of the caches.

[+Don_J]

I have done two like this, and was amused both times, but wouldn't like the novelty to catch on and start seeing a lot of them. One was a puzzle cache, and seems like a lot of cachers calculated wrong. The owner put a cache in the wrong location with a note saying 'Try again' and a hint.

 

The other was a skirt lifter with about a dozen 'fakes' with the actual being a magnetic nano.

 

Yep, I've seen it several times and it was only cute the first couple times. Kind of like LPC's.

 

I have probably ran into fifteen or so decoys, and I have never been amused, only frustrated. Obviously from reading the responses, as well as those from past threads, many people like to play the game this way. Personally, I don't like them, but I won't begrudge those that do. Around here, the word usually gets out in the first couple of logs, so I can avoid them if I choose.

[+3Woofs]

I think I have managed to create a somewhat tricky cache to find, but I wanted to make it a little "different".

Would it be daft/silly to put "decoy" caches in the "most likely" places for a cache, and in/on those caches put fun messages "close, but keep looking", or "Did you really think we would make it this easy" etc etc - the actual location is going to be, I hope, somewhat unique!

 

Would you be irritated or amused?

 

Any thoughts appreciated/welcome/

 

Cheers

 

J

[+SwineFlew]

Decoy caches only add more drama into the situation. If main cache goes missing, someone is going to sign one of those decoys! Or worse, steal all your decoys.

 

I know only one or two caches with decoys that put a smile on my face. Here is one of them. Its archived now, but look at the pictures and you might get the story. :lol: :lol:

 

Bottom line, dont make your finders feel cheap!

[Clan Riffster]

I am in the early stages of planning a puzzle which will incorporate a decoy, of sorts. There will be a red herring solution which will look real to anyone who ignores the difficulty rating. At those coords, I will have a container with a note telling them they need to rethink their solution. The real solution will require a bit more thought.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Clan Riffster

[+dprovan]

I am in the early stages of planning a puzzle which will incorporate a decoy, of sorts. There will be a red herring solution which will look real to anyone who ignores the difficulty rating. At those coords, I will have a container with a note telling them they need to rethink their solution. The real solution will require a bit more thought.

There's a very nice cacher in our area that fooled me with a red herring solution like that, although without the decoy at the red herring location. I hated her for a year, but I finally got over it. The thing is that if there's a solution, and no check, then I think it's only fair that the solution takes me to the cache. After all, I have no idea why the ratings are like they are, so there's no reason for me to think I'm going to the wrong location until I'm there. And maybe not even then. And by that point, I'm already mad at you. To me, this kind of thing is little better than posting the wrong coordinates on a traditional cache to make it "harder".

[+The_Incredibles_]

I'm found a few like this and found them amusing. Just don't make it a needle-in-the-haystack type hide. This would make it annoying.

[+niraD]

There's a very nice cacher in our area that fooled me with a red herring solution like that, although without the decoy at the red herring location. I hated her for a year, but I finally got over it. The thing is that if there's a solution, and no check, then I think it's only fair that the solution takes me to the cache.

So anytime I get a solution, unless there's a solution checker, I should be able to expect my solution to take me to the cache? Whether I solved the puzzle correctly or not? Whether I understood the true nature of the puzzle or not? Is that what you're saying?

[+jellis]

I tried it with a puzzle and the cachers were not happy. They felt like they wasted their time with traveling. I believe it would only work if it is within 20ft of GZ. Then you can waste their time but not distance.

[+dprovan]

There's a very nice cacher in our area that fooled me with a red herring solution like that, although without the decoy at the red herring location. I hated her for a year, but I finally got over it. The thing is that if there's a solution, and no check, then I think it's only fair that the solution takes me to the cache.

So anytime I get a solution, unless there's a solution checker, I should be able to expect my solution to take me to the cache? Whether I solved the puzzle correctly or not? Whether I understood the true nature of the puzzle or not? Is that what you're saying?

Not at all. I'm saying it's mean to intentionally mislead someone into thinking they've solved it. I have no problem facing my own failings.

 

I tried it with a puzzle and the cachers were not happy. They felt like they wasted their time with traveling. I believe it would only work if it is within 20ft of GZ. Then you can waste their time but not distance.

Hey, speak of the devil! Love ya, jellis!

[+terratin]

Not a big fan myself. Found a mystery a while ago, pulled out the paper, saw several logs on the sheet and signed it as well. Only later did I realize that this must have been a decoy cache gone wrong. Anyway, I don't like them for this reason above, and because all additional containers additionally litter the landscape. Would you pick up all containers if the main one got compromised beyond repair? Who's going to tidy up behindyou should you stop caching?

 

Mrs. Terratin

[+niraD]

There's a very nice cacher in our area that fooled me with a red herring solution like that, although without the decoy at the red herring location. I hated her for a year, but I finally got over it. The thing is that if there's a solution, and no check, then I think it's only fair that the solution takes me to the cache.

So anytime I get a solution, unless there's a solution checker, I should be able to expect my solution to take me to the cache? Whether I solved the puzzle correctly or not? Whether I understood the true nature of the puzzle or not? Is that what you're saying?

Not at all. I'm saying it's mean to intentionally mislead someone into thinking they've solved it. I have no problem facing my own failings.

So all puzzles have to be purely linear, with no red herrings or dead ends or nested layers?

 

Personally, I think it's all part of the game. I've found puzzles that have had obvious solutions that were wrong, with decoys at the wrong coordinate to let you know you still needed to solve the puzzle correctly. I've found puzzles that produced multiple solutions, and part of solving the puzzle correctly was figuring out which of those multiple solutions was correct, ideally without visiting any of the incorrect locations (but some people did take that approach). I've found puzzles with red herrings built into the puzzle itself, where you had to figure out which solution technique was producing the correct coordinates. It's all part of the game.

[+dprovan]

Personally, I think it's all part of the game.

Yes, it's all part of the game. Personally, being intentionally misled into going to the wrong location annoys me, that's all I'm saying. Clan Riffster can still do it if he wants, assuming he's not worried about annoying me.

[Clan Riffster]

Personally, I think it's all part of the game.

Yes, it's all part of the game. Personally, being intentionally misled into going to the wrong location annoys me, that's all I'm saying. Clan Riffster can still do it if he wants, assuming he's not worried about annoying me.

I'm not sure I grok this the same way you do. Assume, for argument's sake, I pull this off. You pull up the cache page and immediately see a solution method. For whatever reason, you opt to ignore the 3 difficulty rating. Whilst I would agree that you were being misled, I would argue that you were the one oing the misleading, and I would suggest that your self deception was accidental, rather than intentional.

 

The clues will be present for anyone willing to pay attention.

[+Don_J]

There's a very nice cacher in our area that fooled me with a red herring solution like that, although without the decoy at the red herring location. I hated her for a year, but I finally got over it. The thing is that if there's a solution, and no check, then I think it's only fair that the solution takes me to the cache.

So anytime I get a solution, unless there's a solution checker, I should be able to expect my solution to take me to the cache? Whether I solved the puzzle correctly or not? Whether I understood the true nature of the puzzle or not? Is that what you're saying?

Not at all. I'm saying it's mean to intentionally mislead someone into thinking they've solved it. I have no problem facing my own failings.

So all puzzles have to be purely linear, with no red herrings or dead ends or nested layers?

 

Personally, I think it's all part of the game. I've found puzzles that have had obvious solutions that were wrong, with decoys at the wrong coordinate to let you know you still needed to solve the puzzle correctly. I've found puzzles that produced multiple solutions, and part of solving the puzzle correctly was figuring out which of those multiple solutions was correct, ideally without visiting any of the incorrect locations (but some people did take that approach). I've found puzzles with red herrings built into the puzzle itself, where you had to figure out which solution technique was producing the correct coordinates. It's all part of the game.

 

So, when someone gets to the container that is placed at the wrong solution, is there something in there to steer them in the right direction, or just a note telling them that they are a failure and to try again? That would probably make a big difference in how the puzzle is perceived.

[+Don_J]

Personally, I think it's all part of the game.

Yes, it's all part of the game. Personally, being intentionally misled into going to the wrong location annoys me, that's all I'm saying. Clan Riffster can still do it if he wants, assuming he's not worried about annoying me.

I'm not sure I grok this the same way you do. Assume, for argument's sake, I pull this off. You pull up the cache page and immediately see a solution method. For whatever reason, you opt to ignore the 3 difficulty rating. Whilst I would agree that you were being misled, I would argue that you were the one oing the misleading, and I would suggest that your self deception was accidental, rather than intentional.

 

The clues will be present for anyone willing to pay attention.

 

The only way that the D3 would be relevant to me is if I am familiar with your other puzzles. I've made it clear that I am not a fan of puzzle caches, but I do look at each one that gets published in my area. I have solved a D4 is less than a minute while the local puzzle masters struggled. I have also stared for hours at a D1.5 and can't figure it out.

[+niraD]

So, when someone gets to the container that is placed at the wrong solution, is there something in there to steer them in the right direction, or just a note telling them that they are a failure and to try again? That would probably make a big difference in how the puzzle is perceived.

That depends.

 

Sometimes there's just nothing there. That could also be the case where I managed to extract coordinates from a "find the puzzle" puzzle in a way the CO never intended.

 

Sometimes there's nothing there, but the fact that the incorrect location is in the middle of the bay (or somewhere else equally implausible) is a big hint.

 

Other times, there's a note that says that this is not the correct location and you should try again. Or that you're very close, and should keep trying.

 

Other times, there's a note with the coordinates of the previous stage (where you can try to solve the field puzzle again).

 

Other times, the incorrect solution gives coordinates that don't make sense (e.g., N 37° 25.502 W 122° 93.834).

 

Other times, there's a "replacement" log signed by others who thought the decoy was the cache.