Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Run4thetop

Suggestion: New cachetype = Challenge Cache?

Recommended Posts

Hello comunity!

 

Ive been thinking, there is a lot of uknown caches around that aquires that you log different kind of caches\places\D/T combinations/countries etc....

So called challenges. Just around teh corner from where I live there is a cache that requires that i log 50 caches with the word church in it, obviously caches placed near churches...

But why not make a new cache-type called "Challenges" instead of using "Unknown" og "Traditional" cache as most people do today?

 

Id support a new cache type for sure!

 

Any thoughts?

 

Groundspeak comment?

 

/Run4thetop

Share this post


Link to post

Many people feel the same as you, maybe for different reasons, and it's been suggested many times in the past. I don't know whether GS are considering it or not.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that a challenge cache attribute would be a Good Thing. Required use, as the word "Challenge" is currently required in challenge cache titles.

 

A new cache type is a huge effort - making it fit across all platforms. It's easy to break the 3rd party software that people use to play the game, and how that stuff works is outside Geocaching.com control( but when they introduce site changes that break 3rd party software, the complaints are heaped on Geocaching.com not the guy who wrote weak code for whatever device).

 

Here are some fairly recent threads on this topic.

Challenge geocaches should have their own type

 

Icon for Challenge Geocaches

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that a challenge cache attribute would be a Good Thing. Required use, as the word "Challenge" is currently required in challenge cache titles.

 

A new cache type is a huge effort - making it fit across all platforms. It's easy to break the 3rd party software that people use to play the game, and how that stuff works is outside Geocaching.com control( but when they introduce site changes that break 3rd party software, the complaints are heaped on Geocaching.com not the guy who wrote weak code for whatever device).

 

 

Not only that, it would be a nightmare to get a new cache type work just throughout the Geocaching.com website. There's probably a reason they haven't added a cache type since Letterbox Hybrids in 2002. :P

 

Of course they've taken a few away from us since then. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
haven't added a cache type since Letterbox Hybrids in 2002...

 

Aw come on, you remember better than that.

May 7, 2001, Jeremy added cache types, previously all were Geocache. Created at that time: Traditional, Multi-cache, Letterbox hybrid, Virtual, Unknown, Event

May 2001 A.P.E. (only GSP could create)

Jan or Feb 2002 Webcams

April 2002 Locationless (only briefly available for creation, quickly a moratorium on new)

April 2003 CITO

Jan 2004 Earthcache

May 2006 Mega (only GSP can grant type)

June 2007 GPS Maze (only GSP can grant type)

Jan 2008 Wherigo

May 2010 - 10 Year Events (only GSP can grant type)

HQ cache (cache older, icon from 2010) and HQ Lost & Found event (July 2010) HQ Annual Block Party (Aug 2011, recurring) all GSP created only

Aug 2013 Lab Caches (only GSP can grant type)

Aug 2014 Giga (only GSP can grant type)

 

The last publicly available new cache type is Wherigo, from Jan 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
haven't added a cache type since Letterbox Hybrids in 2002...

 

Aw come on, you remember better than that.

May 7, 2001, Jeremy added cache types, previously all were Geocache. Created at that time: Traditional, Multi-cache, Letterbox hybrid, Virtual, Unknown, Event

May 2001 A.P.E. (only GSP could create)

Jan or Feb 2002 Webcams

April 2002 Locationless (only briefly available for creation, quickly a moratorium on new)

April 2003 CITO

Jan 2004 Earthcache

May 2006 Mega (only GSP can grant type)

June 2007 GPS Maze (only GSP can grant type)

Jan 2008 Wherigo

May 2010 - 10 Year Events (only GSP can grant type)

HQ cache (cache older, icon from 2010) and HQ Lost & Found event (July 2010) HQ Annual Block Party (Aug 2011, recurring) all GSP created only

Aug 2013 Lab Caches (only GSP can grant type)

Aug 2014 Giga (only GSP can grant type)

 

The last publicly available new cache type is Wherigo, from Jan 2008.

 

Hey, I'm trying to defend them here. :P I agree I missed CITO, Earthcache and Whreigo. But who in their right mind wouldn't have forgotten Wherigo??? And I'd consider the "only GSP can grant type" and the different sizes of events to not be the same as adding a raw cache type, such as Earthcaches.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Aug 2013 Lab Caches (only GSP can grant type)

 

The last publicly available new cache type is Wherigo, from Jan 2008.

I'm not sure what you mean by "only GSP can grant type", but back in February where everyone (or maybe every PM) was invited to create a Lab cache which could only be found once I created one, as did thousands of others, although I admit Lab caches are a bit of a special case in many respects.

Share this post


Link to post

My agreement is posted in a similar thread from a few months back along with an icon suggestion to differentiate from the Purple/Blue ?

Share this post


Link to post

But you could potentially have a multi, letterbox or even maybe a puzzle cache, challenge cache. Solve the puzzle to get the location, attend 10 events to complete the challenge. Would it be a challenge, or a puzzle? I don't think creating a new cache type is the right way to go, but rather an attribute. Something sortable by a PQ.

Share this post


Link to post

How about something like an attribute, which can be applied to any existing cache type, but offers a separate quantitative valuation proportional to the difficulty of completing the requirements?

 

[FEATURE] Challenge Stars

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like to see 3 new cache types, Challenge, PT and Geo Art. I'd rather see the latter 2 as cache types rather than attributes as well.

Edited by Roman!

Share this post


Link to post
I'd like to see 3 new cache types, Challenge, PT and Geo Art. I'd rather see the latter 2 as cache types rather than attributes as well.
I think the logging requirement already makes Challenge Caches sufficiently unique for them to be their own type.

 

But unless something changes to make numbers run caches or geoart caches significantly different from existing cache types, I don't see them becoming their own cache types. Examples have been proposed (e.g., for numbers run caches or for geoart caches), but it seems that part of the appeal of numbers run caches or geoart caches is that they use the existing cache types.

Share this post


Link to post
I'd like to see 3 new cache types, Challenge, PT and Geo Art. I'd rather see the latter 2 as cache types rather than attributes as well.
I think the logging requirement already makes Challenge Caches sufficiently unique for them to be their own type.

 

But unless something changes to make numbers run caches or geoart caches significantly different from existing cache types, I don't see them becoming their own cache types. Examples have been proposed (e.g., for numbers run caches or for geoart caches), but it seems that part of the appeal of numbers run caches or geoart caches is that they use the existing cache types.

 

For either I think the appeal is the +1 not the cache types. If for the geoart icon they could let the CO select the colour and it was a simple round or square icon (in essence pixels) you could have some pretty cool geoart..

Share this post


Link to post

I actually agree that I would like to see Challenges with a different icon. Not for the same reason as most have pointed out but because they are often at the posted coords. I work on average 30-100+ miles from home. While I am out working there I will often take a break and grab a cache or 2 maybe more depending. Am I going to try and solve a puzzle on my phone while out there? NO but I could find a challenge at the posted coords whether I qualify at the time or not. I know I can (and do) look threw the puzzles in the area for the name to have challenge in them but it would be much easier if it was a different icon so I knew. Not saying to change it but it could be helpful for me anyways.

Share this post


Link to post

I think things should be left as is. But if any changes WERE on the horizon, I'd vote for the cache type.. not because I want another icon. But so that they are more readily apparent on the map. While an attribute is an ok idea, I can't determine what is what when just idly browsing the maps.

Share this post


Link to post

Since Challenge caches allow ALRs and generally are located at the given coordinates, the mystery icon seems entirely ill suited.

Edited by fbingha

Share this post


Link to post

Since Challenge caches allow ALRs and generally are located at the given coordinates, the mystery icon seems entirely ill suited.

The Mystery icon, by its very definition as a catch-all, suits every cache. A cache of this type can be nearly anything, hence the "?". While a new type may be defined in such a way as to make a better fit, challenge caches fit just fine under the Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle/(whatever GS is deciding to call it today) type.

 

Don't confuse that cache type as being one where a puzzle must be solved and the cache is not at the posted coordinates. That type includes, but is not limited to, caches with those characteristics.

 

Personally, I'd vote for an attribute, for the same reason that you wouldn't have a night cache type. As T.D.M.22 pointed out, a challenge cache can have characteristics of a multi, puzzle, or some of the other cache types. Therefore, they should be listed as the best-fit cache type, with an attribute to indicate that the cache also has challenge cache-style ALRs. If people are concerned about not being able to pick them out on the map, maybe the developers could code the map so that it modifies the icon if it has the attribute. How about putting a "*" on it?

Edited by The A-Team

Share this post


Link to post

Since Challenge caches allow ALRs and generally are located at the given coordinates, the mystery icon seems entirely ill suited.

The Mystery icon, by its very definition as a catch-all, suits every cache. A cache of this type can be nearly anything, hence the "?". While a new type may be defined in such a way as to make a better fit, challenge caches fit just fine under the Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle/(whatever GS is deciding to call it today) type.

 

Don't confuse that cache type as being one where a puzzle must be solved and the cache is not at the posted coordinates. That type includes, but is not limited to, caches with those characteristics.

 

Personally, I'd vote for an attribute, for the same reason that you wouldn't have a night cache type. As T.D.M.22 pointed out, a challenge cache can have characteristics of a multi, puzzle, or some of the other cache types. Therefore, they should be listed as the best-fit cache type, with an attribute to indicate that the cache also has challenge cache-style ALRs. If people are concerned about not being able to pick them out on the map, maybe the developers could code the map so that it modifies the icon if it has the attribute. How about putting a "*" on it?

Yawn. I wasn't confusing the original intent of the "catch all" category. Today, the question mark icon is seen by most cachers as a cache that is not located at the posted coordinates since this is how it is most utilized today, not as it was in 2003. Challenge caches should have a different icon as they have ALRs.

 

With non challenge unknown caches, I will go to GZ and from there I will do something that will allow me to find the cache or log a DNF. Yes, of course, there are puzzles that require a computer but let's say I use my smart phone.

 

Challenge caches, I go to GZ, and there is nothing I can do to log a find unless I've already achieved the ALR or willing to go do it. If I've found 27,000 caches then chances are, whatever the challenge is, I've already done it.

 

My opinion, Challenge caches are distinct enough from every other 'unknown' cache to have its own cache type. I admit, I am not fond of Challenge caches as I see them having become quite 'cheesy'. Merely a quick reward for the prolific cacher. Definitely a perk for the Platinum Members.

 

I am stuck on the ALR. Just my opinion, as I said. No one needs to correct it.

 

 

Edited by fbingha

Share this post


Link to post

 

My opinion, Challenge caches are distinct enough from every other 'unknown' cache to have its own cache type. I admit, I am not fond of Challenge caches as I see them having become quite 'cheesy'. Merely a quick reward for the prolific cacher. Definitely a perk for the Platinum Members.

 

I am stuck on the ALR. Just my opinion, as I said. No one needs to correct it.

 

I could post some "challenge trails" where every single finder of the caches is a premium member with thousands of finds. This probably represents a fraction of 1% of the overall Geocaching populace. :P

 

That being said, I'm down with them having their own type.

Share this post


Link to post

We have a trackable that is on our list as previously found that we are watching. It jumped out the other day as it had over 400,000 miles on it. I looked up the logs for the trackable and found that it was accumulating miles that were in reality not being done. when I contacted the person who currently has the trackable to find out how the trackable was getting this mileage he said he was doing challenge caches. I will relate only one example. He lives in California. He went on a trip to South Africa - over 10,000 miles. He finds a cache and logs it and indicates the trackable has "visited". He then finishes a challenge cache that originated in California and logs it the same day and indicates when logging that the trackable has "visited" - this essentially takes the trackable from South Africa back to California and adds another 10,000 miles. he continues with his holiday and logs more caches found in South Africa. then he finishes another challenge cache from California logging it and adding another 10,000 miles to the trackable.

This is not right. I have contacted Groundspeak to see what they say. If a challenge cache is completed a trackable should not be logged as "visited" for this very reason. Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post

The ironic thing about it is if was to change icons it could make some challenges that some have completed not complete. I know around here there are some challenge to say have found 200 "?" caches. Many of those might have been challenges that helped you to qualify. Then the switch and you would no longer have 200 "?" caches.

Share this post


Link to post

We have a trackable that is on our list as previously found that we are watching. It jumped out the other day as it had over 400,000 miles on it. I looked up the logs for the trackable and found that it was accumulating miles that were in reality not being done. when I contacted the person who currently has the trackable to find out how the trackable was getting this mileage he said he was doing challenge caches. I will relate only one example. He lives in California. He went on a trip to South Africa - over 10,000 miles. He finds a cache and logs it and indicates the trackable has "visited". He then finishes a challenge cache that originated in California and logs it the same day and indicates when logging that the trackable has "visited" - this essentially takes the trackable from South Africa back to California and adds another 10,000 miles. he continues with his holiday and logs more caches found in South Africa. then he finishes another challenge cache from California logging it and adding another 10,000 miles to the trackable.

This is not right. I have contacted Groundspeak to see what they say. If a challenge cache is completed a trackable should not be logged as "visited" for this very reason. Thoughts?

 

My thought is that looks worse on the Cachers stats page then on the trackables. They didn't travel all those miles.

Share this post


Link to post
The Mystery icon, by its very definition as a catch-all, suits every cache. A cache of this type can be nearly anything, hence the "?". While a new type may be defined in such a way as to make a better fit, challenge caches fit just fine under the Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle/(whatever GS is deciding to call it today) type.
Part of the definition of mystery/puzzle caches is that they "often become the staging ground for new and unique geocaches that do not fit in another category."

 

IMHO, the mystery/puzzle type has served its role as a staging ground. Challenge caches are mature as a type, and are distinct enough from other types that they even have their own page of guidelines in the Help Center. I think it's time for them to have their own type.

Share this post


Link to post

Part of the definition of mystery/puzzle caches is that they "often become the staging ground for new and unique geocaches that do not fit in another category."

 

IMHO, the mystery/puzzle type has served its role as a staging ground. Challenge caches are mature as a type, and are distinct enough from other types that they even have their own page of guidelines in the Help Center. I think it's time for them to have their own type.

 

+1.

 

I can live without it, but I do think challenges are distinctive and established enough to warrant their own type.

Share this post


Link to post

To call a challenge a mystery is a nonsense.

 

You know where it is, you know what has to be done to qualify for it.

 

Where is the mystery?

Share this post


Link to post

It would make a perfect sense to make challenges as the extra type, even with special challenge-only attributes that would classify the type of achievement needed (pure statistic achievement, time-based achievement like 16 Bundeslands in one day, regional achievement like 50% of caches in county ABC).

 

At best make them premium-only feature, because people are extremelly complaining about challenges, that they are too hard, require too much time or money, because you can't make them in one region etc.

Share this post


Link to post

Apparently, the more threads on the same topic, the merrier.

Share this post


Link to post

We have a trackable that is on our list as previously found that we are watching. It jumped out the other day as it had over 400,000 miles on it. I looked up the logs for the trackable and found that it was accumulating miles that were in reality not being done. when I contacted the person who currently has the trackable to find out how the trackable was getting this mileage he said he was doing challenge caches. I will relate only one example. He lives in California. He went on a trip to South Africa - over 10,000 miles. He finds a cache and logs it and indicates the trackable has "visited". He then finishes a challenge cache that originated in California and logs it the same day and indicates when logging that the trackable has "visited" - this essentially takes the trackable from South Africa back to California and adds another 10,000 miles. he continues with his holiday and logs more caches found in South Africa. then he finishes another challenge cache from California logging it and adding another 10,000 miles to the trackable.

This is not right. I have contacted Groundspeak to see what they say. If a challenge cache is completed a trackable should not be logged as "visited" for this very reason. Thoughts?

 

The owner of the trackable could delete those extra trips to California if they want to. Then Recalculate will fix the mileage. Or maybe it doesn't bother them, they like the mileage that it accumulates.

Share this post


Link to post

The ironic thing about it is if was to change icons it could make some challenges that some have completed not complete. I know around here there are some challenge to say have found 200 "?" caches. Many of those might have been challenges that helped you to qualify. Then the switch and you would no longer have 200 "?" caches.

If the challenge was completed at the time challenges were classified as "?" caches, then the challenge was successfully completed. I doubt any challenge cache owner would (or even could) retroactively delete "Found Its" if challenge caches were assigned their own cache types.

 

On the other hand, if someone had 199 "?" finds when challenges were split into their own type, then I could see some challenge owners saying that person no longer had 199 "?" finds and needed to rebuild their "?" numbers. But that same situation could happen if a cache owner changes their D/T ratings and causes someone to be -1 further away from completing their Fizzy challenge. That's just one of the risks of attempting challenges.

Edited by CanadianRockies

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×