Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 9
Tshio

A little tale that contains a reflection about Geocaching, Adventure Labs, and the relations between them

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

Now the question I have is, are you concerned it will ruin your own statistic or do you just don't like the idea that someone is getting 5 points for very little effort?

I don't think completing an AL is an effortless task. It varies a lot. Actually, I recently completed an AL in an abandoned factory that gave me a lot of thrill and sweat. I really loved playing it, but still: why every step should count as a found geocache?

Please note that this would never ruin my stats: to the opposite, if my main goal were stats, I would be happy to have 5 more free founds.

I simply think it's illogical to make every step count as a found geocache.

Edited by Tshio
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Jimrky said:

Can I be a fly on the wall (or cc'd on the email you send) to inform Bryan Roth of that?? Hmmm??

Actually, writing a report to Groundspeak to inform them of this issue is exactly what i want to do. So I ask everyone who thinks that ALs are abnormally inflated to upvote my original post, that will be linked on the report.

And don't worry, @Jimrky, I'll keep you informed about it. Hmmm.

Edited by Tshio

Share this post


Link to post

There are so many different aspects of this game. We should remember that it is just a game. Also there is no winning or losing, well I think of it as winning in that I get entertainment and enjoyment out of playing. The main thing is there is no competition and if padding your stats gives you enjoyment great and maybe they will keep paying GS bills while the do it.

 

I have done 5 all at the museum of flight in Seattle and I only did the because of a mystery cache which was found inside the museum. That was kind of cool but that was the last one I did awhile ago but none since. As some have said it is not my thing.

 

We should all just play the game the way we get entertainment from. I just wish a lot of the improvement would be focused on enhancing the primary aspect of the game rather than these side games.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Jimrky said:

Well, gee. Marty - so if Groundspeak, through their wholly-owned entity Geocaching® counts a construct as a cache YOU are going to tell them it's not?

 

Well it was you who brought up the fact that they define what Geocaching is, I was just pointing you to how that definition doesn't cover ALs.

 

And yes I (and others) have told them that it's not - that's what this very thread is doing, and many other threads have done it in a more direct way.

If you expect me to mail Bryan, well that's not going to happen, there is a platform to  feedback on Geocaching - it's these forums. I don't know whether Bryan reads the forums (I know Jeremy used to)  or whether the  concerns expressed in here are fed back to him but I would hope they are, and I hope they're listening to those concerns.

 

Quote

Can I be a fly on the wall (or cc'd on the email you send) to inform Bryan Roth of that?? Hmmm??

 

Rhetoric will get you nowhere. But it's fun to watch folks try that again, and again, and again - as if rhetoric mattered

 

You seem to see Bryan as some sort of Kim Jong-Un character, and us mere mortals shouldn't dare to question the Dear Leader, or criticise the state!
 

Feedback through the forums got Geocaching Challenges abandoned years ago, I don't expect that to happen with ALs, and in fact I don't want them to be abandoned as I think they have some merit and a place in the game.  I  think Groundspeak haven't done a very good job with them, but with some tweaks they would be more wildely accepted.


I've said elsewhere I think they need to:

  • Fully integrate them, so they count on all the stats etc.
  • Include them on all the filters/searches/maps/PQs  as are all  other caches.
  • Bring their stats in line with other caches - 1 AL=1find.
  • Allow 3rd parties to provide a player app.

 

Or:

  • Keep them completely separate from the main game (like Waymarking)

 

 

Edited by MartyBartfast
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 28/10/2020 at 11:05, Tshio said:

Digamos que hay dos amigos, Benny y Teddy. 

Teddy es un jugador de tenis entusiasta, mientras que Benny ama los bolos. De vez en cuando, Teddy acepta ir con Benny a la bolera y, a veces, a Benny le gusta jugar un partido de tenis con Teddy. Son buenos amigos y disfrutan pasar tiempo juntos, hablando de sus pasatiempos. Pero Benny siempre prefiere los bolos y Teddy siempre prefiere el tenis. Ambos sienten que el pasatiempo del otro no es realmente para ellos, están de acuerdo con esto y las cosas van bien para todos.

Pero de repente sucede algo que cambia esta idílica condición.

Teddy dice: "Hola Benny, ¿sabes que ayer hice doce strikes?"

Benny está realmente sorprendido: "¿De verdad? ¡Debes haber hecho un gran progreso ya que no pudiste evitar arrojarte el cuenco sobre tus pies!"

Teddy: "En realidad, no lo hice. No he pisado la bolera desde la última vez que me llevaste allí".

Benny está cada vez más perplejo: "Entonces, ¿cómo demonios lograste hacer doce strikes ayer?"

Teddy muestra su smartphone, sonriendo: "¡Mira! Mira mis estadísticas: ayer jugué un partido de tenis y dicen que hice doce strikes ..."

 

A estas alturas, la mayoría de ustedes ya deberían haber captado el mensaje.

Geocaching y Adventure Labs son dos juegos distintos, que son similares en muchos aspectos, pero diferentes en muchos otros. Algunas personas preferirían Geocaching, algunas personas preferirían Adventure Labs y muchas otras disfrutarían jugando a ambos. 

Lo que no puedo entender es por qué, por qué un paso completo de un Laboratorio de aventuras debe contar como un geocaché encontrado. ¿Puedes ganar una partida de ajedrez jugando al póquer? ¿Puedes tener una puntuación alta en los dardos jugando al billar? ¿Puedes encontrar un geocaché jugando Fruit Ninja? Por supuesto no. Así que no puedo entender por qué puedes encontrar un geocaché jugando en un laboratorio de aventuras. Esto realmente no tiene sentido y, además, genera confusión en muchas personas. Tenga en cuenta que no se trata de "si no le gusta, no lo juegue". Al contrario: siendo las cosas como están, es imposible que un jugador de la Liga Americana no juegue Geocaching. Y los jugadores de Geocaching ven a los jugadores de AL alcanzar sus mismos logros jugando a otro juego. 

Al igual que el Waymarking y el Benchmarking, Adventure Labs debe mantenerse separado de Geocaching.

  

Creo que GS hizo las cosas de esta manera para promocionar su nuevo producto, pero esto no ayuda a ninguno de los dos juegos. Bueno, les pido que voten a favor y compartan esta publicación para que GS sea consciente del error. 

Mantenga separados Geocaching y Adventure Labs.

Gracias.

 

Pues si, deberían indicarse los 2 logros por separado, Por ejemplo (GC-5430 y AL-127) .

Son tremendamente parecidos.

Tienen el mismo principio y muchas cosas en común.

La gran diferencia es que no necesitas esconder contenedores y puedes perfectamente culturizarte y conocer mundo.

La base es un recorrido cultural.

Y EVITAS destrozar entorno ya que no hay que levantar piedras ni mover nada de sitio. JAY MUCHA GENTE que son irrespetuosos.

Felicito a los de Aventure Labs.

Simplememnte separen los conseguidos en GC y AL

 

Share this post


Link to post

Once again, I set out to prove I had my finger on the pulse of the Geocaching community; and once again, I was shown to be wrong - this time by a factor of more than 2 to 1. :(

 

I set up a poll on the Facebook Geocaching group (*) to see how (or if) people thought Adventure Lab finds should be incorporated into the overall Geocaching find count.  The poll has been up for 21 hours, and seems to have run its course.  Here are the results:

 

image.png.4d499a6fe5c722399af8f14d84ee793c.png

 

A number of the comments on the post talk about the problems that would be caused by changing the current implementation, so maybe some of those votes for the first option are more for maintaining the status quo, rather than outright approval of the method.  But I'm just clutching at straws. :(

 

It's a pity the question wasn't asked before the current solution was implemented, but I guess the answers may not have been very different...

 

(*) A private group with over 17,000 members worldwide.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 2
  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, IceColdUK said:

A number of the comments on the post talk about the problems that would be caused by changing the current implementation, so maybe some of those votes for the first option are more for maintaining the status quo, rather than outright approval of the method.  But I'm just clutching at straws. :(

 

It's a pity the question wasn't asked before the current solution was implemented, but I guess the answers may not have been very different...

 

(*) A private group with over 17,000 members worldwide.

Yeah I also found that it's too easy to get +5 with AL but sadly Groundspeak decided to go that way and now that they flooded the map it's impossible to back track and only give +1 per adventure.

 

I would vote that they don't count in the total but instead have their different counter.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/29/2020 at 10:01 AM, Mausebiber said:

Now the question I have is, are you concerned it will ruin your own statistic or do you just don't like the idea that someone is getting 5 points for very little effort?

 

I haven't done any because I don't find them appealing enough to me and I struggle (individually) with knowing that each stop along the way counts as a find.  I guess you could call me somewhat of a traditionalist, especially considering I haven't done any Lab caches nor did I do any of the old challenges as neither really followed what I considered a geocache to be.  I could care less how many finds a person gets for completing one and since I've not done one, my find total hasn't gone up accordingly.  My issue isn't with the numbers in that specific regard. 

 

It's more about how a geocache has always been "defined" and then listed on this site.  If an AL (and it's associated stages) is counted as an official geocache (which it is, as you get finds added to your count), then for continuity's sake, I believe they should be implemented on the site in the same manner every other geocache follows - although I don't think submission for publication need be followed as all the stages are virtual and completion isn't dependent upon a signature in a log.  The other option, and one that's far less palatable, is to "convert" all the other types of geocaches so they follow the same principle as ALs do - a find for each stage of ANY cache.  I don't see anyone clamoring for that particular option so let's look at the first idea.

 

A found geocache has always counted as a single find, regardless of how many stages/stops there are along the way.  This new one gives you multiple finds for completing a single AL.  It's a multi or Wherigo on steroids.  I could care less about whether or not any of the stops are finds #1-5 or finds # 13168-13173. It doesn't follow the "traditional" find count that we've had in place for over 20 years now (and which I've been a part for just over 10 now).   You seem to think I'm hung up on the numbers aspect (the find count inflating numbers).  That's not it at all.  It's the fact that EVERY other type of geocache in the past 20 years has counted as a singular find, until this "new" geocache.  Again, I could care less that someone's find count goes up for the simple sake of it going up 5 instead of 1.  It just runs counter to how every geocache find has been counted over these past 20 years.

 

Since it's now been classified as a geocache, it should be fully implemented into the main site, not have its own separate app that requires you to use it to play.  We should be able to see them on the map and while maintenance is virtually non-existent, all other aspects of what owning and finding a geocache entail should be followed as well, minus publication procedures.  Are they afraid that ALs will cover up existing caches and clutter up the map?  How is that any different than what we have in place right now, particularly in very cache dense areas? Wherigo was implemented into the site listings.  While I don't believe it's really supported or encouraged by TPTB, at least it's still viable and there are still Wherigos being created and published.  However, ALs got their own platform and operate separately, despite the fact that they're now considered a geocache.

 

D/T ratings should be assigned in order to make things easier for possible seekers to be made aware of the potential issues that may arise.  Unless things have changed or were reported incorrectly, it was my understanding that D/T ratings for ALs count as 0/0.  Again, for me, it's not about the fact that this could statistically drive down someone's D/T average (although I'm sure that's a potential issue for some).  It's about the fact that there's no way for anyone to get an understanding for what doing a particular AL might entail, unlike every other geocache on this site.  We know, for the most part, how challenging a cache might be as well as how physically taxing it might be and can then make a determination on whether or not it's something you would like to attempt.  Yes, there are some that don't rate their caches correctly but most COs attempt to provide ratings that reflect the challenges of a particular geocache.  That's not an option for ALs, as far as I understand it right now.  

 

I have no problem with Groundspeak attempting to evolve, adapt, change, try something new...... In order to survive, every business has to attempt to improve or run the risk of becoming irrelevant or obsolete.  The single biggest issue I have with ALs is that they're calling them geocaches, despite the fact that they don't adhere to the same guidelines and procedures established over the past 20 years that have defined what a geocache is.  I'm sure there are some very basic, easy, laughable attempts at ALs that allow cachers to quickly accrue finds, just like every other cache type we have.   I'm also sure there are some very creative, enjoyable, and even demanding ALs out there, just like every other cache type we have. 

 

This does NOT mean that I want them removed because I don't agree with how they were implemented and how they've "redefined" what a geocache is.  Just because I think this way doesn't negate the fact that there are others who like this new facet of geocaching and really enjoy them.  To everyone who likes them, for whatever reason, play on.  I'm not going to tell you to stop or advocate for their removal.  I just think they're far enough removed from what I have understood a geocache to be that I am choosing not to do any.

Edited by coachstahly
Clarification
  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Lynx Humble said:

I would vote that they don't count in the total but instead have their different counter.

 

Ding!

  • Beside the name on "true" cache pages, etc, show the total of tangible caches, things that can actually be found.
  • Beside the name on virtual/earth cache pages, show the total of intangible things still confusingly called caches.  They need their own number too.
  • In the AL app, show the count of intangible, dunno, "steps" that have been completed.
  • On the website profile stats page, show it all broken down into the individual totals.

 

That's about as integrated as I think curling and tennis should be.

 

Edited by Viajero Perdido

Share this post


Link to post

Hi coachstahly,

I fully understand you concern and yes, I agree to most of the points you have. 

I have seen so many things  come and go in the last decade that I'm pretty sure, ALs implementation will change also.  Groundspeak is not very fast as far as system changes are concerned and they are constantly working to make a Web-based App also smart phone compatible.  I don't know how much it takes to integrate ALs into the existing Geocaching.com site but since I'm not in a hurry I just lean back, very relaxed and wait.  Meanwhile I just continue with my hobby, there are more than 3 Mio cache out there waiting for me.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, coachstahly said:

far enough removed from what I have understood a geocache to be

 

I see an Adventure Lab as essentially a Virtual Wherigo - the platform may be different but the experience is very similar, except there's no cache at the end.  Add a Bonus cache and the two are pretty much indistinguishable.  Except, of course, for the way they appear in your Find count...

 

Everything else, I agree with. 👍

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, IceColdUK said:

I see an Adventure Lab as essentially a Virtual Wherigo - the platform may be different but the experience is very similar, except there's no cache at the end.  Add a Bonus cache and the two are pretty much indistinguishable.  Except, of course, for the way they appear in your Find count...

 

I do see the similarity and I even have had a few friends mention that they think ALs are the death knell for Wherigos.  Some on here have stated the same thing and Jeff I think brought up multis as possibly on the chopping block as well.

 

I can't imagine that's the case and I hope it isn't.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/29/2020 at 2:11 AM, Tshio said:

Stats are not an essential part of the game. But they exist. And we must admit that for some people they are the main reason of being, but this is another topic, so let's go on...

You say this is not a topic about stats. Yet at least 5 times you've mentioned how AL's affect stats and once how it would be more "acceptable" if it only counted as one find. 

 

why a completed step of an Adventure Lab should count as a found geocache.

 

So I can't understand why you can find a geocache playing an Adventure Lab”

 

And I couldn't help but wondering why every step of an Adventure Lab, that I can't see on the Geocaching map, and to play which I have to open another app, should count as a found geocache.”

 

I simply think it's illogical to make every step count as a found geocache.”

 

the majority of us would have accepted it if every AL have counted as a found, and not five. It's a really illogical inflation,”

 

Since you've stated that “the majority of us would have accepted it if every AL have counted as a found, and not five” I would have to assume (perhaps erroneously) that, because of that statement, you are part of that majority and you would accept Al's IF they only counted as one point.

That being the case, I fail to see how this Isn't about stats. It would seem the crux of the post is how many points AL,s should be worth.

 

I fully agree with you that if its going to count, it should count as one find. I think that's a valid point. We don't count each stage of a multi as a find so why each stage of an AL? I also agree that if it can be done, then it should be part of the geocaching app (though I seldom use the app)  But don't really care.  When I look at my stats page I see 20 cache types that can add finds to my stats and I've only found 6 of the types available. I have the ability to choose my geocaching experience from any or all of them.

 

As eluded to in my previews post in this thread. The activity of geocaching (Its not a game or a competition) started as finding a container, in the woods, with swag and a log inside. Now its called a traditional, its the original cache type and 19 more have come along since then. People have debated against quite a few of them over the years.

 

Putting the genie back in the bottle can be tough. Good luck in your endeavor!

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

Geocaching is a real-world, outdoor treasure hunting game using GPS-enabled devices. Participants navigate to a specific set of GPS coordinates and then attempt to find the geocache (container) hidden at that location.

 

This bolded part doesn't fit either.  :D      

I really miss the "language of location"...

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, coachstahly said:

 

D/T ratings should be assigned in order to make things easier for possible seekers to be made aware of the potential issues that may arise.  Unless things have changed or were reported incorrectly, it was my understanding that D/T ratings for ALs count as 0/0.  Again, for me, it's not about the fact that this could statistically drive down someone's D/T average (although I'm sure that's a potential issue for some).  It's about the fact that there's no way for anyone to get an understanding for what doing a particular AL might entail, unlike every other geocache on this site.  We know, for the most part, how challenging a cache might be as well as how physically taxing it might be and can then make a determination on whether or not it's something you would like to attempt.  Yes, there are some that don't rate their caches correctly but most COs attempt to provide ratings that reflect the challenges of a particular geocache.  That's not an option for ALs, as far as I understand it right now.  

 

Actually ALs don't count at all in D/T statistics. The total in the bottom right hand corner of the D/T grid excludes any AL finds, so mine shows 1240 whereas elsewhere my find count appears as 1275.

 

image.png.4afd818d8d92584e4c1f30612ac012c1.png

 

There are some other statistics ALs aren't included in, such as container types and distance to finds. It all seems a bit of a mish-mash at the moment.

 

I mentioned this in the other thread in the AL subforum but I'll repeat it here as it's relevant to the discussion. I've been caching for nearly eight years but have only done ALs in the last two months, having completed seven of them, yet in my Cache Types I've Found statistics, they've already overtaken Earthcaches, Events and Virtuals.

 

image.png.f9350d171f787ab44f9ea5b6f55b347a.png

 

It sure doesn't feel like I've done more ALs than ECs, events or virtuals, but the statistics don't lie. Clearly I have and soon they'll outnumber multis too.

 

My understanding is that the 5-stage limit on ALs is just for the current trial phase and that this limit will likely be lifted once they go mainstream. My wild imagination is envisaging something like a Central Coast Railway AL where you hop on a train from Sydney to Newcastle and each station along the way is an AL location with a simple question you can answer without leaving the train (it might be just to name each station, perhaps). That journey takes a bit under three hours and has 34 stops. Who needs power trails?

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

It sure doesn't feel like I've done more ALs than ECs, events or virtuals, but the statistics don't lie

You are right, because the chart above does NOT list any ALs.

Share this post


Link to post

I’m not sure if everyone understands the concept of Adventure Lab.

An Adventure Lab is an umbrella construct to hold, as it is now, 5 Lab Cache.

So you are asking Groundspeak for an Adventure and you are getting permission to create 5 cache.

 

Those 5 LabCache now can be anything, a traditional type cache, a multi stage or mystery type cache, everything just without a container at the end.

 

The individual LabCache can be very close to each other which can be used f.i. for museums, or they can be miles away.  They can have the same subject like “historical buildings in the old part of town”, or just anything you, as AL Owner want to share with others.  They can have pictures or videos embedded with questions or instructions, you can be sent to 10 stages before you come back to answer the final question, almost like signing a logbook.  You can be required to solve a puzzle (like a field puzzle) before you move on and so much more. 

In many ways, LabCache are not different than other caches.  Some just throw a traditional behind a guardrail or at the light pole in a parking lot, others are really creative and taking much effort in their hides.

 

But still, we are talking about individual cache, called LabCache, just published under one umbrella.  I assume, if Groundspeak would not issue ALs but 5 LabCache, and LabCache owner would publish 5 individual cache, very few would complain.

 

  • Funny 2
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

But still, we are talking about individual cache, called LabCache, just published under one umbrella.  I assume, if Groundspeak would not issue ALs but 5 LabCache, and LabCache owner would publish 5 individual cache, very few would complain.

 

If you can show me where I can write a log for an individual LabCache, or even give it a rating, I'll be more inclined to accept your argument.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

If you can show me where I can write a log for an individual LabCache, or even give it a rating, I'll be more inclined to accept your argument.

I answered this question further up, but it does not change anything.  Next question would be, "But how do you filter on individual cache " and then the next question "but I can't find it on my web-page, and then " why can I play it with my Garmin GPSr and so on.

 

If you don't like it, fine, I'm not facing any advantages or disadvantages, but reading everything above, my impression is, that many just mixing everything.  35 LabCache are NOT 35 ALs, and no you are not getting 5 points for one Al,  just small examples.  You don't have to create 5 Labcache under one Al, you could as well just create 2.  This way, you would get 2 points only.

 

What you see here is a glimps of the future, no container, no logbooks, more internet, less problems with neighbors or permissions with landowners.  The "old way" is fading out, there is a new generation who wants "our" game but played in a different way.  I understand that many are scared about it, but I guess, we have to get used to it.

.

 

Edited by Mausebiber
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

I’m not sure if everyone understands the concept of Adventure Lab.

...

So, to enlighten us, can you point to where this definition/description is published?

 

Quote

Those 5 LabCache now can be anything, a traditional type cache, a multi stage or mystery type cache, everything just without a container at the end.

 

The individual LabCache can be very close to each other...

So  theoretically an Adventure Lab could be :

Go to these co-ords and read the notice:
Lab
Cache1: What's the 1st word? = What
Lab Cache2: What's the 2nd word? = A
Lab Cache3: What's the 3rd word? = Waste
Lab Cache4: What's the 4th word? = Of
Lab Cache5: What's the 5th word? = Time


5x:) - happy days.

Edited by MartyBartfast
  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

Go to these co-ords and read the notice:
Lab
Cache1: What's the 1st word? = What
Lab Cache2: What's the 2nd word? = A
Lab Cache3: What's the 3rd word? = Waste
Lab Cache4: What's the 4th word? = Of
Lab Cache5: What's the 5th word? = Time

 

Yes, true, but it could be as well as the sample below, one LabCache with multi level instructions and a video you have to see, otherwise you want find the next stage.

But for me it is very interesting what your understanding of an AL is.

 

Erika.thumb.jpg.c6e645416073a4b2f30749fb87a984bb.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

So, to enlighten us, can you point to where this definition/description is published?

 

 

Oh boy, but here it is:

https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=144&pgid=510

 

 

But quite obviously you are not interested in an open discussion, so I leave you alone in you world.

Have fun.

Edited by Mausebiber
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

 

Oh boy, but here it is:

https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=144&pgid=510

 

 

But quite obviously you are not interested in an open discussion, so I leave you alone in you world.

Have fun.

 

But what words on that page make this distinction that you quoted above, i.e. :-
 

Quote

An Adventure Lab is an umbrella construct to hold, as it is now, 5 Lab Cache.

 

The very fact that the page you linked to contain these two sections in sequence, suggests to me that an "Adventure Lab" and an "Adventure lab Cache" are interchageable, and are in fact the same thing, as opposed to one being a superset of the other as you have posted here (and elsewhere):-

 

Quote

Log an Adventure Lab

...

Delete an Adventure Lab Cache find 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

So my take on adventure labs is that, yes, I do enjoy them. But they don’t feel like geocaches to me. They feel like a totally separate game.

 

So I made a second geocaching account; mPZLabs, to log my adventure lab finds on. I know some people might view this as pointless which is fair enough. But I personally felt like it was the right thing to do for me. I can enjoy Geocaching the traditional way we all know and love under my normal name, and also enjoy adventure labs in a different light 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
57 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:
1 hour ago, MartyBartfast said:

Go to these co-ords and read the notice:
Lab
Cache1: What's the 1st word? = What
Lab Cache2: What's the 2nd word? = A
Lab Cache3: What's the 3rd word? = Waste
Lab Cache4: What's the 4th word? = Of
Lab Cache5: What's the 5th word? = Time

 

Yes, true,...

Well there you have my (and I suspect many others') main issue with the way ALs work in the current implementation. 


You are clearly happy  that this is acceptable, but I maintain that such a scenario devalues the whole Geocaching game/pastime/hobby/sport.

 

Please try and persuade me that such a scenario, resulting in 5 finds,  is reasonable and is more acceptable than  the scenario I have argued for which would result in 1 find. 

 

Edited by MartyBartfast
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

Well there you have my (and I suspect many others') main issue with the way ALs work in the current implementation. 


You are clearly happy  that this is acceptable, but I maintain that such a scenario devalues the whole Geocaching game/passtime/hobby/sport.

 

Please try and persuade me that such a scenario, resulting in 5 finds,  is reasonable and is more acceptable than  the scenario I have argued for which would result in 1 find. 

 


This is why I personally find my adventure labs finds on a separate account. I don’t feel right them adding to my main cache find total. If I’m going to find five caches, I’d rather they be physical, great hides than five words I can input. I do find the bonus caches and log them as normal but that’s because they’re physical containers. Every adventure lab find for me is logged via my other account as to me, it’s a different game

  • Upvote 4
  • Funny 2
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, mmmPIZZA said:

So I made a second geocaching account to log my adventure lab finds on

 

I've done the same thing, it solves the problem nicely. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Mausebiber said:

What you see here is a glimps of the future, no container, no logbooks, more internet, less problems with neighbors or permissions with landowners.  The "old way" is fading out, there is a new generation who wants "our" game but played in a different way.  I understand that many are scared about it, but I guess, we have to get used to it.

 

That's fine, but it really is a different game with a different scoring regime. Mixing the two is mixing apples and oranges, particularly with the mish-mash we have now when AL waypoints count in some statistics but not others. What's my find count now? In some places I see 1240 but in others I see 1280 and that discrepency is only going to get greater, much greater considering that I've been caching for nearly eight years but only doing ALs for two months.

 

So here's today's counter-example. I have a series called Chasing Waterfalls, currently six caches with a common theme that shouldn't be too hard to work out. Do them all and you get six smileys. But each of those is a multi, showcasing multiple points of interest in and around those waterfalls, and each will take considerable time and effort to complete. By contrast, this morning I did a waterfall-themed AL at Somersby Falls. It has five locations along a walking track that went from the parking area at the top down past three consecutive waterfalls. Each location had one question and the whole thing took me about half an hour, including writing my single log at the end, but for that my find count went up by five. As I said, it's apples and oranges, or perhaps that should be grapefruit and grapes. They're separate things in almost every aspect so why are the scores combined it what's a very lopsided manner?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MartyBartfast said:

You are clearly happy  that this is acceptable, but I maintain that such a scenario devalues the whole Geocaching game/pastime/hobby/sport.

 

It's been devalued for years. Ever since the tools of the site became a score instead of a way to find caches that match our needs and likes. Now it's all about scoring. Perhaps you mean the it devalues the game/scoring/sport aspect of what the pastime/hobby/recreational-activity has become. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

What you see here is a glimps of the future, no container, no logbooks, more internet, less problems with neighbors or permissions with landowners. 

 What, like M**z**s :(

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

So  theoretically an Adventure Lab could be :

Go to these co-ords and read the notice:
Lab
Cache1: What's the 1st word? = What
Lab Cache2: What's the 2nd word? = A
Lab Cache3: What's the 3rd word? = Waste
Lab Cache4: What's the 4th word? = Of
Lab Cache5: What's the 5th word? = Time

 

To me, this is equivalent to the power trail school of thought. Points for the least amount of effort. 

Unfortunately it has infected ALs too. Not surprising though. 

I've found a couple of very well done ALs that were far better then finding the nearby button nano caches. 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

Catching up with this thread... here a couple of my thoughts.

 

If you don't care about numbers or statistics, then the concern about AL in statistics isn't really relevant, and if your argument is - "I don't care about numbers, so you should just let it be," that's not really helpful =/

 

The find count is public, it does make a statement about a user - it has an inherent meaning. If you don't care about numbers, then sure it's irrelevant - to you. And you don't have to be a lover of numbers to have an understand of what the numbers mean.  You can not care about numbers but still infer something about a user by seeing their "find count".  As barefootjeff has demonstrated a few times in the thread, the inflation of the find count can be entirely a concern over what the numbers mean even to yourself, regardless of what others think.

 

The vast majority of concerns I've seen are not about 'winning' or 'competing', so it's not really helpful to label everyone who's a critic as caring about that - being competitive or only caring about numbers.

 

I don't think I've ever seen one person say Adventure Labs should go away, or hope to ruin other people's fun. On the contrary, it seems people are fine with ALs existing, even in concept (despite of course an expected stream of suggestions to improve the implementation, as with any game/tech/etc).  The overwhelming criticism seems to be (and I'd wager this is the tipping point) that every stage of an Adventure Lab counts as a single find each. I won't reiterate the details of that as they've been outlined a few times above. But that's the single crossover aspect of the two games that's causing the significant portion of criticism.

 

Some may advocate for not including them at all, but like IceColdUK's poll, I'd guess that most who'd support a change would be fine if they only included +1 for a full set of code entries, not one for each.  And IMO, that makes the most logical sense given their current implementation.  It may be a technical leftover from the very early stages, but when they launched "Adventure Labs" in their current form, I think they missed the cue on how they're counted in stats - not that they're counted in stats.

 

I said tipping point earlier because yeah, I think the people who are more adamant against ALs probably wouldn't have made nearly as big a deal about them if they weren't so prominently included in the traditional "geocaching finds" count, and those who are critical seem to imply they'd have been just fine with 1 per.

 

(and yeah, I agree IceColdUK, I think that many if not most of those top votes could be classified as "keep the status quo" rather than "I want multiple finds per AL")

 

 

Last point: Enter keyword = Yay! I found a geocache!  ... ick. :P

Edited by thebruce0
typos, grammar
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

 

To me, this is equivalent to the power trail mentality. Points for the least amount of effort. 

 

 

I disagree, try a power trail solo. Getting in and out of the car was such tedious work. Never want to do it again. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

 

Well it was you who brought up the fact that they define what Geocaching is, I was just pointing you to how that definition doesn't cover ALs.

 

And yes I (and others) have told them that it's not - that's what this very thread is doing, and many other threads have done it in a more direct way.

If you expect me to mail Bryan, well that's not going to happen, there is a platform to  feedback on Geocaching - it's these forums. I don't know whether Bryan reads the forums (I know Jeremy used to)  or whether the  concerns expressed in here are fed back to him but I would hope they are, and I hope they're listening to those concerns.

 

 

You seem to see Bryan as some sort of Kim Jong-Un character, and us mere mortals shouldn't dare to question the Dear Leader, or criticise the state!
 

Feedback through the forums got Geocaching Challenges abandoned years ago, I don't expect that to happen with ALs, and in fact I don't want them to be abandoned as I think they have some merit and a place in the game.  I  think Groundspeak haven't done a very good job with them, but with some tweaks they would be more wildely accepted.


I've said elsewhere I think they need to:

  • Fully integrate them, so they count on all the stats etc.
  • Include them on all the filters/searches/maps/PQs  as are all  other caches.
  • Bring their stats in line with other caches - 1 AL=1find.
  • Allow 3rd parties to provide a player app.

 

Or:

  • Keep them completely separate from the main game (like Waymarking)

 

 

 

 

...I'm trying to understand how directly addressing nothing that I posted is an answer. And where I made any, ANY, inference (let alone statement) that Bryan Roth was somehow nefarious? What do you have against Bryan?

 

But I will suggest that you listen to Bryan's podcast appearances where he has spoken on this topic. You might be enlightened!

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

If you can show me where I can write a log for an individual LabCache, or even give it a rating, I'll be more inclined to accept your argument.

 

5 caches have 5 dots on the map.

 

An Adventure Lab has one dot on the map.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Jimrky said:

I'm trying to understand how directly addressing nothing that I posted is an answer.

But in your post that I was directly replying to (and quoted) you said

 

Quote

Rhetoric will get you nowhere. But it's fun to watch folks try that again, and again, and again - as if rhetoric mattered


and my post was a direct response to that where I pointed out that in the past rhetoric, very similar to that being expressed here, actually resulted in a complete rethink and a U-turn by Groundspeak.

Other than that the only point you've made is that "Groundspeak own Geocaching and they can do what the want with it and we shouldn't complain or criticise" - We all know that ultimately they can do what they want with it, but we should complain if we disagree with the direction they're taking, otherwise they could end up making a bad call and ostracizing their paying customers which might hit their bottom line.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

5 caches have 5 dots on the map.

 

An Adventure Lab has one dot on the map.

 

Not a great argument.

An Adventure Lab has zero dots on the geocaching map.

  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

But in your post that I was directly replying to (and quoted) you said

 


and my post was a direct response to that where I pointed out that in the past rhetoric, very similar to that being expressed here, actually resulted in a complete rethink and a U-turn by Groundspeak.

Other than that the only point you've made is that "Groundspeak own Geocaching and they can do what the want with it and we shouldn't complain or criticise" - We all know that ultimately they can do what they want with it, but we should complain if we disagree with the direction they're taking, otherwise they could end up making a bad call and ostracizing their paying customers which might hit their bottom line.

 

 

 

"Missed" the main point of another post, didn't you? Nah - you didn't miss it, you pivoted. If you're going to make statements and attempt to attribute them to another person, kindly have the wherewithal to support your actions. What you do is seen to be done, and BTW, you are not a "we" nor do you speak for anyone but yourself. But after 50 years of handling such I know when I'm going to be wasting my time pursuing anything further.

 

That said - Happy Halloween. I'm off. 🎃🎃🎃

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/31/2020 at 9:55 AM, Mausebiber said:

What you see here is a glimps of the future, no container, no logbooks, more internet, less problems with neighbors or permissions with landowners.  The "old way" is fading out, there is a new generation who wants "our" game but played in a different way.  I understand that many are scared about it, but I guess, we have to get used to it.

This is my fear.... once these things hit the main map the poor old multi will be dead in the water first I think. With a bit of a rush lately, we now have 25 AL's in my area, 125 virtuals basically..... and with doubles being handed out left right and centre, it is just the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/30/2020 at 7:12 PM, MartyBartfast said:

I've said elsewhere I think they need to:

  • Fully integrate them, so they count on all the stats etc.
  • Include them on all the filters/searches/maps/PQs  as are all  other caches.
  • Bring their stats in line with other caches - 1 AL=1find.
  • Allow 3rd parties to provide a player app.

 

Or:

  • Keep them completely separate from the main game (like Waymarking)

+1

I'd add - proper logging and public notifications, and offline capability.

Edited by lee737
added everything after 'I'd add'....

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, lee737 said:

This is my fear.... once these things hit the main map the poor old multi will be dead in the water first I think. With a bit of a rush lately, we now have 25 AL's in my area, 125 virtuals basically..... and with doubles being handed out left right and centre, it is just the beginning.

 

We now have seven on the Central Coast with two at Gosford and one at Somersby Falls appearing in the past week. I'm still the only one to have completed and logged the Somersby Falls one so maybe the novelty is starting to wear off, or maybe it's just the wet weather that's keeping everyone indoors. As soon as the weather clears I'll be looking around for a T4 multi to really sink my teeth into before they all go extinct.

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/30/2020 at 3:55 PM, Mausebiber said:

What you see here is a glimps of the future, no container, no logbooks, more internet, less problems with neighbors or permissions with landowners.  The "old way" is fading out, there is a new generation who wants "our" game but played in a different way.  I understand that many are scared about it, but I guess, we have to get used to it.

 

If so, that is a complete reversal of what Groundspeak has said about geocaching.  One of the reasons virtual caches were dropped, was that without a container it wasn't really a cache, and they wanted to focus on container type caches.  (I know that EC's are also virtual caches, but when they tried moving them all to Waymarking, there was a hue and cry that got them to bring them back.)  And if they are moving to a virtual based game, why are the allowing/encouraging bonus (physical) caches for AL's?  So I have my doubts about your conclusion about where geocaching is going...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

What you see here is a glimps of the future, no container, no logbooks

 

Just now, The Jester said:

If so, that is a complete reversal of what Groundspeak has said about geocaching. ...

 

True, but most hiders and finders have turned a blind eye to containers and logbooks. They are for the most part items that are forced upon hiders in order to list a cache. So most hiders look for minimum cost and effort to comply.  Something free or cheap (under a dollar) that almost always isn’t suitable for outdoor use. Most use scraps of paper and when they get full finders replace or add more scraps of paper. They never go back to monitor and maintain the container. When some finders place NMs or NAs on these caches they are called cache cops. It seems that most don’t care about the container or log. So the argument that geocaching  is about the container and log doesn’t hold water, unlike most containers these days. 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

most hiders and finders have turned a blind eye to containers and logbooks

 

When asked about how caching has changed over the years in an interview at a mega last year, a local reviewer responded that fancy containers have become a thing now that nice locations are already taken.

 

Also, am I no longer on the timeline where no film canisters made it to landfill because they were all turned into geocaches?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

True, but most hiders and finders have turned a blind eye to containers and logbooks. They are for the most part items that are forced upon hiders in order to list a cache. So most hiders look for minimum cost and effort to comply.  Something free or cheap (under a dollar) that almost always isn’t suitable for outdoor use. Most use scraps of paper and when they get full finders replace or add more scraps of paper. They never go back to monitor and maintain the container. When some finders place NMs or NAs on these caches they are called cache cops. It seems that most don’t care about the container or log. So the argument that geocaching  is about the container and log doesn’t hold water, unlike most containers these days. 

I'm not seeing any trend towards minimal effort or quality in the containers for caches I'm finding. And I, for one, appreciate a physical container for caches that require them. So I reject your assertion that there's any widespread movement towards not requiring containers. I don't mean I have a vague feeling you're probably wrong; I mean what you're saying is completely inconsistent with geocaching in my area. I'm sorry you're seeing something different, but I think you've made a mistake by thinking it's anything but a local phenomenon.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

True, but most hiders and finders have turned a blind eye to containers and logbooks.

They are for the most part items that are forced upon hiders in order to list a cache.

So most hiders look for minimum cost and effort to comply.  

Something free or cheap (under a dollar) that almost always isn’t suitable for outdoor use.

Most use scraps of paper and when they get full finders replace or add more scraps of paper.

They never go back to monitor and maintain the container.

When some finders place NMs or NAs on these caches they are called cache cops.

It seems that most don’t care about the container or log. So the argument that geocaching  is about the container and log doesn’t hold water, unlike most containers these days. 

 

Not even a close to accurate opinion piece...

  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Not even a close to accurate opinion piece...

I strongly disagree with you I see the same thing as reported by Lone.R in my area too.

 

In my area I have hundreds and hundreds of leaking pill bottle placed by CO that left the game or by CO that will never come back for the maintenance.

 

Some players want so much their smiley that they put dozens of throwdowns or Log With Permission because they are part of a team but never come ever close to GZ...

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Lynx Humble said:

I strongly disagree with you I see the same thing as reported by Lone.R in my area too.

In my area I have hundreds and hundreds of leaking pill bottle placed by CO that left the game or by CO that will never come back for the maintenance.

Some players want so much their smiley that they put dozens of throwdowns or Log With Permission because they are part of a team but never come ever close to GZ...

 

"Some" players and most aren't the same...

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

True, but most hiders and finders have turned a blind eye to containers and logbooks. They are for the most part items that are forced upon hiders in order to list a cache. So most hiders look for minimum cost and effort to comply.  Something free or cheap (under a dollar) that almost always isn’t suitable for outdoor use. Most use scraps of paper and when they get full finders replace or add more scraps of paper. They never go back to monitor and maintain the container. When some finders place NMs or NAs on these caches they are called cache cops. It seems that most don’t care about the container or log. So the argument that geocaching  is about the container and log doesn’t hold water, unlike most containers these days. 

 

Most of the caches I'm finding now are newer ones as I've already found all the old ones in my area. The most common container is one of the varieties of Sistema and the most common logbook is a spiral-bound notepad.

 

ContainersAndLogs.jpg.ae52d1ab597a5cb12294a9e6df8bda68.jpg

 

Yes, both are cheap and can be had from the local supermarket for just a few dollars, but they seem to perform well as caches in the environment here, particularly if their hiding place protects them from the sun.

 

For the less common micros (they're outnumbered here by smalls and regulars), usually they're a bison tube with a preprinted log sheet.

 

Micro.jpg.586777f60d39f7bc1ebb967dbef7cd33.jpg

 

So yes, it obviously varies a lot from place to place and community to community. Newcomers learn from what they find so particular styles tend to become established in local areas. For my part, if it's not a novelty cache I generally use a Sistema and a waterproof "Tradie" notepad. This is my most recent hide:

 

MyLatest.jpg.abf7ecfdd79a3aa1c820d36491689a56.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/31/2020 at 9:55 AM, Mausebiber said:

What you see here is a glimps of the future, no container, no logbooks, more internet, less problems with neighbors or permissions with landowners.  The "old way" is fading out, there is a new generation who wants "our" game but played in a different way.  I understand that many are scared about it, but I guess, we have to get used to it.

 

That is indeed sad if that really is the way the game is going. Many of the nicest places to go caching here have no internet access (and also no neighbours to worry about), and for me a lot of the pleasure of the game comes from the shared experience through seeing other cachers' experiences in their logs and photos. The depersonalised and almost anonymous way ALs are played is taking that away, making it just a bunch of individuals wandering around while staring at their phones.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 9

×
×
  • Create New...