Multi-Cache or a Series of Single Caches?

[+Laughing at the Sky]

I want to create a series of caches that lead people on a short walk round a particular lovely area. Is it better to create a multi-cache, or create a series of single caches?

 

Benefits of a multi-cache:

- I can link them together with clues.

- People are more like to do the whole walk.

 

Benefits of a series of single caches:

- People can do just 1 or 2 rather than whole series.

- People can see the route on the map.

- People will get a smiley face for each cache.

[+J Grouchy]

If you provide waypoints in a multi, the whole route will show on the map on the cache page itself.

 

The good thing about a multi is you can 'force' people to take a specific route, if that is your goal. Otherwise, if that is not important, traditionals may be the way to go and have the added benefit of allowing folks to come back again and again on different days if they choose to break up their finds.

[+Laughing at the Sky]

I think I want people to take a specific route.

[+MartyBartfast]

If you make it a single multi you'll get a lot less visitors than a series, and I don't just mean fewer logs - a lot of cachers will skip the multi. But if you do do it as a multi put something on the page saying how long the walk is and roughly where it will finish.

 

BTW if you're going to call it "The Great Cabbage Hunt" you can't put other vegetables in it as food isn't allowed in caches

[+chaosmanor]

IMHO, a well-done multi of five steps is worth far more than five plain-vanilla traditionals. There is a small, but devoted, number of cachers out there who agree with me. If you are willing to accept that the bulk of cachers are into numbers more than experiences, but that those of us who appreciate experiences are worth attracting, then do the multi. You won't get as many logs, but I bet those logs that you do get will be a lot more interesting to read than a dozen TFTCs.

 

Just my three-and-a-half cents

[+ColwynMagpie]

Personally I would always choose a multi over a set of traditionals.

 

As chaosmanor says, there are a lot of people out there who would just beeline from one traditional cache to the next in order to rack up a few smilies. With only one smiley as a reward I expect cachers would take their time a bit and focus more on the experience. Plus, you can make it more fun and interesting with some creative clues along the way!

[+dprovan]

The question here is quality vs. quantity. More people will do the individual caches, but they'll be less likely to read the cache description and will be less likely to see the design as a whole.

 

On the other hand, fewer people will do a multi, but if the multi is based on collecting information along the walk, then seekers must to read the description to discover what information they need to collect, and they're motivated to direct their attention to whatever it is you want them to see.

 

My personal preference depends on how well you can integrate the multi into the area. If you have good ideas for what you want people to look at and read along the route (i.e., virtual stages), then I'd prefer a multi. If you're just going to drop pointers (i.e., physical stages), then you might as well use a series of traditional caches. But let me hasten to add that I'm just saying that because you asked. Multicaches with a series of pointers are fun, too, so I have no problem with you doing that if that's what you feel like.

[+geodarts]

The dividing line with me is whether a multi just seems like it has a number of containers just to find a number of containers, or whether there is a reason for the different steps. The search is the least interesting thing about this game for me, so I would skip a multi that has no articulated purpose.

 

Another option might be to have a series of traditionals with information necessary to find a bonus cache. I have seen some very creative caches that did not simply rely on collecting numbers, but instead provided clues or information to allow the final to be found. This cache, which is unfortunately now archived is a an example of this. A similar cache cache includes instructions at each of the steps on how to built a pyramid that is used to locate the final.

 

In either event, one thing to consider is that if a cache goes missing, the multi or series may not be able to be completed -- so if it is in an area where maintenance may take several weeks, it might be a factor.

Edited April 22, 2015 by geodarts

[+K13]

Why not do something different. Set up a Wherigo to lead finders along the path you choose. Many cachers will come to find a different cache like that, and expect to have multi-like stages. You could even have some traditional caches along the way.

[+niraD]

Personally, I'd rather do a single multi-stage cache (whether it's listed as a multi-cache, as a mystery/puzzle cache, as a letterbox hybrid, as a Wherigo cache, or as something else). And I'd rather own a multi-stage cache.

 

But the real question is what kind of cache(s) you want to own and maintain for the long term, and what kind of cache(s) you want to be known for among the local geocaching community.

[+jellis]

I prefer multis with virtual stages over physical ones as they don't take up space for someone else wanting to put caches out and they don't go missing as easily.

But lately I have put out a couple of easy Wherigos which are fun and easy to create. Adding images and questions and answers or just make a tour with interactive information about the sites you want to take them too.

[+Seaglass Pirates]

A small series of themed caches every time. Especially if it is near more caches that others have not done. You're in the UK so fuel isn't cheap. If people travel to your area (which they will), they will be more likely to incorporate your series as part of caches around it. A multy will just slow them down. Sad but true. Some will do it but only locals will make a point of doing it. The logs will still be brief (have a look at your nearest multy's and you'll see for yourself) but they will at least touch on their experience. A small series will at some point attract TFTC. If you do a series your inbox will explode initially. It won't with a multy. Anything more than three waypoints on a multy will erode visitor count.

 

If you're serious about it and you want a lot of visitors create a series of one cache type per cache. So a multy, traditional, Wherigo (good luck with that btw), Earth cache, puzzle? If it tics another box for people who strive for statistics it will trawler them in. I'm thinking the whole cache types in one day challenge thingy.

 

Or just go with your instincts. Remember parking options. Land owner issues. Proximity to other caches. Container types. Accurate coordinates. Get a friendly local cacher to assist you. Don't place them outside someones house if you can help it people hate that. And remember ... It can be cached and dashed it will be cached and dashed. There may be a lot of talk about walking a series and poo pooing of driving round it. But they will. They mostly all do at some point. So if a house holder has 10 car loads a day for the first month stopping and rummaging in their hedge oposite you may end up replacing that cache endlessly. So to minimise that state it's not doable in a car and place them nowhere near lay-bys. It won't stop them. Ever. But it will minimise it. Especially if it's a couple of miles walk. Remember attributes if it's themed. The children one will encourage family's. So bigger boxes more swaps will earn you great logs. If it's on a fast road it will earn you negative logs. You will get bored of dog poo logs if it's on footpaths near housing. You just have to switch off to that. You could take people to landscape like the Isle of White needles, if they have to pass a chip van and a cow shed it will be logs full of made me starving and sick all at the same time. "Didn't stop for chips because of the flies". The smell of the cows and vinager put me off won't be back for the one we missed. It will have made them queasy ... they will be back at least twice for the one they missed.

 

Whatever you decide have fun and I assure you it will be worth it and at times upsetting. You will get 10 logs singing your praises and one naff log will knock you down. Just remember it's people not geocashing.

[+MartyBartfast]

You could of course do both: create a multi with virtual stages taking us on the walk you have in mind, then along the route place a few trads to entice the numbers hounds.

[+Laughing at the Sky]

Thanks for all the great replies.

 

My rough idea at the moment is this:

 

I already have 2 stick geocaches I got from eBay. I have just ordered 4 rock geocaches from Amazon. I was thinking of creating a series or multi called "Sticks and Stones". If it's a multi, I was thinking of having co-ordinates and clue for each subsequent step. I might have a final 7th stage which could be a box full of actual sticks and stones, as a kind of joke? Who's with me on that?

 

One possible way I could do something which is a compromise between the two types:

 

I could have them as separate caches, all with their own separate listing and co-ordinates, but I could have the hints for each cache inside the previous cache. The hint for the first cache would be on their GPS, but they have to find them in order to get the other hints. So it would be possible to find them randomly, but easier to find them in order.

 

Wouldn't this cover all requirements?

[+niraD]

Another thing to keep in mind:

 

The various stages of a single multi-cache can be closer to each other than 528ft/161m.

 

Separate caches in a series have to be 528ft/161m apart from each other.

[+jellis]

So a multy, traditional, Wherigo (good luck with that btw), Earth cache, puzzle? If it tics another box for people who strive for statistics it will trawler them in. I'm thinking the whole cache types in one day challenge thingy.

 

What do you mean by that? Because not everyone has a smartphone or a Wherigo enabled GPS?

[+Seaglass Pirates]

So a multy, traditional, Wherigo (good luck with that btw), Earth cache, puzzle? If it tics another box for people who strive for statistics it will trawler them in. I'm thinking the whole cache types in one day challenge thingy.

 

What do you mean by that? Because not everyone has a smartphone or a Wherigo enabled GPS?

 

I didn't but it's a good point. What I meant is that it is not the easiest thing to create. A Wherigo cartridge. But you're point is much more significant especially if the OP were to do what they intend. A series where each cache supplies a clue to the finals location.

[+jellis]

Many cachers now days have smartphones even if they don't use them for caching. And Wherigos have changed. They maybe more easy to create then a multi or a Puzzle. A child could do it. Hey I did it. I've created two and as Ranger Fox says you could almost create one in 5 mins.

[+jellis]

And did you read my post? They could create an interactive tour with pictures and historical info. And have it as a fun question and answer game. Look at the logs on my Wherigos.

[+MartyBartfast]

 

I could have them as separate caches, all with their own separate listing and co-ordinates, but I could have the hints for each cache inside the previous cache. The hint for the first cache would be on their GPS, but they have to find them in order to get the other hints. So it would be possible to find them randomly, but easier to find them in order.

 

Wouldn't this cover all requirements?

 

If you mean hint as in "it's at the base of the stile" then that would work but if you mean that Cache-1 has the co-ords for Cache-2, Cache-2 has the co-ords for Cache-3,etc... then that's called daisy-chaining and isn't allowed. If Cache-n goes missing then it becomes impossible to find ALL subsequent caches. You can do a series with a Bonus cache, whereby all caches in the series contain part of the co-ords for the bonus, which is slightly different in that the loss of a single cache only makes the Bonus impossible and not all other subsequent caches.

[+Seaglass Pirates]

Many cachers now days have smartphones even if they don't use them for caching. And Wherigos have changed. They maybe more easy to create then a multi or a Puzzle. A child could do it. Hey I did it. I've created two and as Ranger Fox says you could almost create one in 5 mins.

 

I did not know that. Thank you I was going from what I was told ... when recounting the experience they turned pale at the mention so I knew it wasnt for us. Ill have to rethink it then and have a look.

 

... but if you mean that Cache-1 has the co-ords for Cache-2, Cache-2 has the co-ords for Cache-3,etc... then that's called daisy-chaining and isn't allowed.

 

I had no idea about that either. But each cache after the first would be a puzzle cache anyway wouldnt it. But good info. Thank you.

[+coachstahly]

 

I didn't but it's a good point. What I meant is that it is not the easiest thing to create. A Wherigo cartridge. But you're point is much more significant especially if the OP were to do what they intend. A series where each cache supplies a clue to the finals location.

Ranger Fox's Wherigo kit is basically a drag and drop Wherigo creator. You can make it a tour guide type Wherigo or you can ask questions at various points along the way, either multiple choice or open ended. Loading up a picture is just as easy.

 

Wherigo Kit

[Luckless]

Sticks and stones, those have proven to be difficult to find, easily misplaced (they get tossed away while looking) or time consuming (for example the stone in a huge pile of stones). A multi that takes up a lot of time or has caches missing can cease to be fun and some people won't bother. If a multi seems too time consuming maybe have it so individual caches can be logged and include a number in each container that can be used to find a final cache.

[+Seaglass Pirates]

 

I didn't but it's a good point. What I meant is that it is not the easiest thing to create. A Wherigo cartridge. But you're point is much more significant especially if the OP were to do what they intend. A series where each cache supplies a clue to the finals location.

Ranger Fox's Wherigo kit is basically a drag and drop Wherigo creator. You can make it a tour guide type Wherigo or you can ask questions at various points along the way, either multiple choice or open ended. Loading up a picture is just as easy.

 

Wherigo Kit

 

Thank you coachstahly I will have a good rummage with that. Many Thanks

[+jellis]

Sticks and stones, those have proven to be difficult to find, easily misplaced (they get tossed away while looking) or time consuming (for example the stone in a huge pile of stones). A multi that takes up a lot of time or has caches missing can cease to be fun and some people won't bother. If a multi seems too time consuming maybe have it so individual caches can be logged and include a number in each container that can be used to find a final cache.

Then the final would have to be a puzzle. And where does it say daisy chain isn't allowed. Wasn't that the original way a multi was done?

[+jellis]

 

I didn't but it's a good point. What I meant is that it is not the easiest thing to create. A Wherigo cartridge. But you're point is much more significant especially if the OP were to do what they intend. A series where each cache supplies a clue to the finals location.

Ranger Fox's Wherigo kit is basically a drag and drop Wherigo creator. You can make it a tour guide type Wherigo or you can ask questions at various points along the way, either multiple choice or open ended. Loading up a picture is just as easy.

 

Wherigo Kit

I like the multiple choice because you can't go wrong. You have 3 chances to get it right. Open ended you get frustrated if you don't know the answer or if you get the spelling wrong.

[+redsox_mark]

Then the final would have to be a puzzle. And where does it say daisy chain isn't allowed. Wasn't that the original way a multi was done?

 

I'm not sure if it is documented (in the public guidelines). I can't find it searching for "daisy" or "chain" anyway. But I know from a local reviewer that you are only allowed a "chain" of 1. So you can have 10 caches which all give a clue/coords for a bonus cache. Or you can have cache A gives you the coords for B. But you can't have a series where A gives you B, B gives you C.

[+jellis]

Then the final would have to be a puzzle. And where does it say daisy chain isn't allowed. Wasn't that the original way a multi was done?

 

I'm not sure if it is documented (in the public guidelines). I can't find it searching for "daisy" or "chain" anyway. But I know from a local reviewer that you are only allowed a "chain" of 1. So you can have 10 caches which all give a clue/coords for a bonus cache. Or you can have cache A gives you the coords for B. But you can't have a series where A gives you B, B gives you C.

Are you talking about a series or Multis?

Multis Yes

Series unsure but the series could have parts to the final which needs to be a puzzle

[+MartyBartfast]

Then the final would have to be a puzzle. And where does it say daisy chain isn't allowed. Wasn't that the original way a multi was done?

 

I'm not sure if it is documented (in the public guidelines). I can't find it searching for "daisy" or "chain" anyway. But I know from a local reviewer that you are only allowed a "chain" of 1. So you can have 10 caches which all give a clue/coords for a bonus cache. Or you can have cache A gives you the coords for B. But you can't have a series where A gives you B, B gives you C.

 

like redsox_mark I got this from comments I've seen from a number of reviewers in the forums over the years, I don't know whether it's written in the rules anywhere but a search for "daisy chain" in the forums will throw up lots of threads, including this one http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=281852&hl=daisy%20chain&st=0 where you might (or might not - I haven't read it) find chapter and verse.

[+MartyBartfast]

Then the final would have to be a puzzle. And where does it say daisy chain isn't allowed. Wasn't that the original way a multi was done?

 

I'm not sure if it is documented (in the public guidelines). I can't find it searching for "daisy" or "chain" anyway. But I know from a local reviewer that you are only allowed a "chain" of 1. So you can have 10 caches which all give a clue/coords for a bonus cache. Or you can have cache A gives you the coords for B. But you can't have a series where A gives you B, B gives you C.

Are you talking about a series or Multis?

Multis Yes

Series unsure but the series could have parts to the final which needs to be a puzzle

 

A mutlti: 1 cache, 1 smiley, many waypoints. If any of the waypoints is missing you lose out on 1 smiley.

A series bonus: 1 cache, 1 smiley, many "feeder" caches. If any of the feeder caches is missing you lose out on 1 smiley.

A daisy chain: Many caches, many smileys, each cache contains information required to find the next cache, if any cache is missing you lose out on all the smileys on the rest of the caches in the chain.

[+jellis]

Then the final would have to be a puzzle. And where does it say daisy chain isn't allowed. Wasn't that the original way a multi was done?

 

I'm not sure if it is documented (in the public guidelines). I can't find it searching for "daisy" or "chain" anyway. But I know from a local reviewer that you are only allowed a "chain" of 1. So you can have 10 caches which all give a clue/coords for a bonus cache. Or you can have cache A gives you the coords for B. But you can't have a series where A gives you B, B gives you C.

Are you talking about a series or Multis?

Multis Yes

Series unsure but the series could have parts to the final which needs to be a puzzle

 

A mutlti: 1 cache, 1 smiley, many waypoints. If any of the waypoints is missing you lose out on 1 smiley.

A series bonus: 1 cache, 1 smiley, many "feeder" caches. If any of the feeder caches is missing you lose out on 1 smiley.

A daisy chain: Many caches, many smileys, each cache contains information required to find the next cache, if any cache is missing you lose out on all the smileys on the rest of the caches in the chain.

And a Multi with loggable stages is no different then a series but is really just duplicate logs. There is no rule about duplicate logs but it is to me and many others just a way to add numbers.

[+Laughing at the Sky]

 

I could have them as separate caches, all with their own separate listing and co-ordinates, but I could have the hints for each cache inside the previous cache. The hint for the first cache would be on their GPS, but they have to find them in order to get the other hints. So it would be possible to find them randomly, but easier to find them in order.

 

Wouldn't this cover all requirements?

 

If you mean hint as in "it's at the base of the stile" then that would work but if you mean that Cache-1 has the co-ords for Cache-2, Cache-2 has the co-ords for Cache-3,etc... then that's called daisy-chaining and isn't allowed. If Cache-n goes missing then it becomes impossible to find ALL subsequent caches. You can do a series with a Bonus cache, whereby all caches in the series contain part of the co-ords for the bonus, which is slightly different in that the loss of a single cache only makes the Bonus impossible and not all other subsequent caches.

 

Yes, I mean as in "it's at the base of the stile". So the co-ordinates for every cache in the series would be on their GPS, but the hints would be in each previous cache in the series.

[+Laughing at the Sky]

Sticks and stones, those have proven to be difficult to find, easily misplaced (they get tossed away while looking)

Well, the cache name and the description will make it clear that they are looking for either a stick or a stone.

 

But isn't making them difficult to find part of the fun?

[Luckless]

 

I could have them as separate caches, all with their own separate listing and co-ordinates, but I could have the hints for each cache inside the previous cache. The hint for the first cache would be on their GPS, but they have to find them in order to get the other hints. So it would be possible to find them randomly, but easier to find them in order.

 

Wouldn't this cover all requirements?

 

If you mean hint as in "it's at the base of the stile" then that would work but if you mean that Cache-1 has the co-ords for Cache-2, Cache-2 has the co-ords for Cache-3,etc... then that's called daisy-chaining and isn't allowed. If Cache-n goes missing then it becomes impossible to find ALL subsequent caches. You can do a series with a Bonus cache, whereby all caches in the series contain part of the co-ords for the bonus, which is slightly different in that the loss of a single cache only makes the Bonus impossible and not all other subsequent caches.

 

Yes, I mean as in "it's at the base of the stile". So the co-ordinates for every cache in the series would be on their GPS, but the hints would be in each previous cache in the series.

 

Interesting- have to give this more consideration for possibilities.

[+jellis]

 

I could have them as separate caches, all with their own separate listing and co-ordinates, but I could have the hints for each cache inside the previous cache. The hint for the first cache would be on their GPS, but they have to find them in order to get the other hints. So it would be possible to find them randomly, but easier to find them in order.

 

Wouldn't this cover all requirements?

 

If you mean hint as in "it's at the base of the stile" then that would work but if you mean that Cache-1 has the co-ords for Cache-2, Cache-2 has the co-ords for Cache-3,etc... then that's called daisy-chaining and isn't allowed. If Cache-n goes missing then it becomes impossible to find ALL subsequent caches. You can do a series with a Bonus cache, whereby all caches in the series contain part of the co-ords for the bonus, which is slightly different in that the loss of a single cache only makes the Bonus impossible and not all other subsequent caches.

 

Yes, I mean as in "it's at the base of the stile". So the co-ordinates for every cache in the series would be on their GPS, but the hints would be in each previous cache in the series.

If you mean traditional caches with coords to the next traditional cache, that isn't allowed. Trads have to be at the posted coords. Better to have trads with parts of the final coords in each cache. Or multi with each stage having coords to the next stage or virtual stages by having something to help with the coords to the final like "how many swings to you see in the playground. But if you are trying to focus on the history I think the new Wherigos are great for this. No physical stages t maintain, and less complicated and more fun.

[+Laughing at the Sky]

Thanks for all your feedback everyone. I knew it was a good idea to voice my rough ideas here first, and see what the experienced geocaching community had to say. Even if I don't necessarily agree with every word everyone says, it's really helpful to shape my plans for my geocache.

 

This will be the first cache(s) I've hidden, after about 2 years of off-and-on geocaching. So it's worth giving it a bit of thought and seeing what others think.

 

I'm thinking the best way forward would be to create a series of separate caches, each with their own co-ordinates on the website, but with the additional hints in each previous cache (for example "it's in the ivy covered tree"). This would encourage people to do them in order, but not force them to, and they will get a separate point for each cache.

 

By the way, the walk I'm going to put them on is really nice, and it will be good to bring more people to that area.

[+fbingha]

I place a multi-cache in a park on Oct 2013. It has 5 or six virtual stages within .25 miles that ask you to identify something at the location and use magic to determine the coordinates of the final. The stages are of interesting physical objects that are from the park's history. Within this same area, of course, are other single stage geocaches. In this time, my cache has been found 8 times. Another premium member cache, in the same area, has been found 40 times. You can see there has been many premium members that have seen my cache on the map and chosen to not bother with it, even though visiting its stages takes you quite close to other single stage caches, which they are already visiting.

[+MartyBartfast]

 

And a Multi with loggable stages is no different then a series but is really just duplicate logs. There is no rule about duplicate logs but it is to me and many others just a way to add numbers.

 

OK, never come across one of those, maybe it's something that only happens "over the pond", but I agree it sounds like just a way to add numbers and I wouldn't do it.

[+jellis]

 

And a Multi with loggable stages is no different then a series but is really just duplicate logs. There is no rule about duplicate logs but it is to me and many others just a way to add numbers.

 

OK, never come across one of those, maybe it's something that only happens "over the pond", but I agree it sounds like just a way to add numbers and I wouldn't do it.

Just because you haven't heard anyone doing doesn't mean it happens only here on this side of the pond.

[+MartyBartfast]

 

Just because you haven't heard anyone doing doesn't mean it happens only here on this side of the pond.

 

Maybe you're right, I'd be interested to see some evidence

[+jellis]

Same here

[+Laughing at the Sky]

I've just realised that I don't actually like most multi-caches. Today I tried to find some that were the usual type where you find numbers from gravestones to use as the co-ordinates. I don't like doing that, as it just feels like I'm doing pointless work to find the cache. I'd rather just have a single cache that's well-hidden and difficult to find than just have to go through the ridiculous charade of entering numbers from gravestones.

 

So anyway, I think I'm just going to make a straightforward series of traditional caches in a loop. Simple.

[+jellis]

You as you feel comfortable with. Just remember more caches mean more maintenance. Another reason I am encouraging a Wherigo is you will have a new icon on your hides. Less maintenance and it's fun.

[+Laughing at the Sky]

Me submitted me caches. Just waitin for da review, innit.