Huge weakness: Can't plan AL ahead

[+fizzymagic]

So I got the GSAK macro that lets me download Al stages as waypoints for my GPS (literally the most obvious thing that should have been available from the start but I digress) and tried looking through them to find interesting ALs.

 

Did you know that if an AL creator has specified a particular order, you can see info about the first location, but you can't see any information at all about later locations until you get there! 

 

Seriously.

 

You can't plan ahead, as you have no information (save for the coords, which if you didn't have GSAK you couldn't have anyway) about any further stages.

 

Planning ahead for fun geocaching adventures is a part of the activity I really enjoy.  Going to the coordinates blindly and and then reading about the cache is not my style.  Why is that style forced on me by the design of the AL app?

 

I keep trying to like Als but the entire design just about makes it impossible.

[+dprovan]

I would assume that the AL creator thought it would enhance the experience if the path was a surprise. I don't think you can complain about ALs in general because some owners decided to use that feature.

 

I guess you don't like multicaches, either. I like to plan ahead, too, but I also like the notion that a multicache might take me off plan.

 

[+Max and 99]

Planning ahead for geocaching is a part I enjoy. So it really irks me when owners of multi-caches don't tell me ahead of time where all the stages are going to be. Many times I don't know where the stages are or what's going to be there until I actually get there. 😁 Why? Because they are the owners of the multi-cache and they get to decide. Just like the owners of the adventure lab get to decide how their story or Adventure unfolds. 

Edit: I don't use GSAK and it's pretty easy to get the coordinates of even the greyed stages in a sequential Adventure Lab.

Edited May 15, 2021 by Max and 99

[+HHL]

1 hour ago, fizzymagic said:

Did you know that if an AL creator has specified a particular order, you can see info about the first location, but you can't see any information at all about later locations until you get there!

That's like it works with the Adventure Lab app. Having AdLabs imported into GSAK you'll see all descriptions even with AdLabs where stations have to be done in a preset order.

 

 

Hans.

Edited May 15, 2021 by HHL

[+fizzymagic]

Thanks, Hans.  That was helpful.  Everyone else, who compared ALs to a multicache, is missing the point.  I can ignore multicaches by type; it is impossible without opening the AL to know that the owner has made it a required-order one.

 

I

[+Max and 99]

You don't know till you open a multicache page whether the owner has made all the stages visible or not. 

[+IceColdUK]

I’m confused - nothing new there!

 

6 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

So I got the GSAK macro ... Did you know that if an AL creator has specified a particular order, you can see info about the first location, but you can't see any information at all about later locations until you get there!

 

4 hours ago, HHL said:

Having AdLabs imported into GSAK you'll see all descriptions even with AdLabs where stations have to be done in a preset order.

It reads to me as if Hans is saying the opposite to you: that he can see the details of all sequential stages of an AL in GSAK.

 

So far I’ve only loaded completed ALs into GSAK.  Guess I need to have a play...

Edited May 15, 2021 by IceColdUK

[+HHL]

3 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

It reads to me as if Hans is saying the opposite to you: that he can see the details of all sequential stages of an AL in GSAK.

Right.

[+fizzymagic]

19 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

You don't know till you open a multicache page whether the owner has made all the stages visible or not. 

 

Thanks for your deep insight.  I know I could never have figured it out on my own.

[+Max and 99]

14 minutes ago, fizzymagic said:

 

Thanks for your deep insight.  I know I could never have figured it out on my own.

You came to the right place. I'm glad we could help. 

[+thebruce0]

The GC forums, serving the community since... oh time has no meaning here. 

[+dprovan]

On 5/15/2021 at 1:07 AM, fizzymagic said:

Everyone else, who compared ALs to a multicache, is missing the point.  I can ignore multicaches by type; it is impossible without opening the AL to know that the owner has made it a required-order one.

I don't know why you say we missed that point when you didn't make that point. You made a point about the AL design, and I pointed out it had nothing to do with the AL design, just about the AL owner's choice. And I further pointed out that multicaches have the same problem, hoping you'd either concur or explain what was different about them. Instead, you claimed that something was different, but then acted as if the difference is you can ignore multicaches, but it's even easier to ignore ALs.

 

I think there's plenty of room for improvement in ALs, and we've discussed many of them. But your OP seems more like an unfair attack, implying that this feature you find annoying is fundamental and an argument against ALs in general.

 

So let's go back to your initial point: yes, I think it would be a great -- even necessary -- feature of the AL app that there be a way to show all the visible AL waypoints on the map, not just the AL start point. Obviously it would have to be by request since the existing feature of showing the simpler map of the general location of the ALs in an area is also an important feature, probably more important than the more crowded and confusing map showing all waypoints at once with little ability to show which one is in which AL. I can't help but think the only reason that wasn't done from the beginning is because of the technical challenge. We can debate the minor detail of whether that would show subsequent waypoints in a sequential AL after we convince the app developers to add the feature.

 

And second, it sounds like you think a way to identify and even filter out sequential ALs would be useful. I wouldn't object to that, but in the current situation, you already have to use a non-GS app to do your planning. While waiting for GS to enhance the app, the obvious answer is to convince that 3rd party developer to add the ability to filter sequential ALs. The AL design allows that, after all. I don't know if the 3rd party app can see the "sequential" flag, but you told us it only sees one stage of a sequential AL, so that should do the trick.

[+fizzymagic]

Thanks for all the feedback.  My distaste for over-controlling COs made me blind to the fact that this behavior was enabled for multis already.  Since I generally dislike multis, it should have come as no surprise that it extends to this kind of AL.

 

It is hard to distinguish between all the flaws in the design of ALs, the poor implementation of the AL app, and my own preferences.  It's just such a target-rich environment and I apologize that I let my personal preferences seem like an attack.

 

I still keep trying to like Als, and I keep failing.

 

For the inevitable comment that "If I don't like them, ignore them:"  I would love to ignore them.  Unfortunately, the site makes that nearly impossible, as they infest the statistics and many other places.

Edited May 16, 2021 by fizzymagic

[+barefootjeff]

6 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

Thanks for all the feedback.  My distaste for over-controlling COs made me blind to the fact that this behavior was enabled for multis already.  Since I generally dislike multis, it should have come as no surprise that it extends to this kind of AL.

 

I like multis, they make up about 7% of my finds and almost a third of my hides. Most of the ones here, and all but one of mine, have visible virtual waypoints so it's generally clear what's involved at least up to the final trek to the unknown GZ, but even with those that have to be followed sequentially through hidden waypoints, the D/T rating and attributes can provide a pretty good indication of what to expect. On my one with hidden physical waypoints, the D/T rating is 3/3.5 and its attributes are:

so it should be clear there's going to be a fair bit of scrambling and climbing involved over a relatively short distance. Most finders seem to like it as it's had 11 FPs from 20 finds.

 

The trouble with ALs is they don't have D/T ratings or attributes, nor is there any scale on the map even when you open it to see where the waypoints are, so it's pretty much pot luck what to expect beyond what's in the overview description and that's limited to 1024 characters.

[+mustakorppi]

I think the forced visible waypoints in Adventures are a mistake, as it is. Or alternatively the game should be called something else than "Adventures". Some kind of attributes (e.g. is a car or some other tool required) and possibly estimated time required to complete might be nice.

[+dprovan]

On 5/16/2021 at 1:09 PM, fizzymagic said:

I would love to ignore them.  Unfortunately, the site makes that nearly impossible, as they infest the statistics and many other places.

I never notice the ALs anywhere. Can you elaborate? Other than the find count -- not an issue for your find count if you don't do any of them -- and the occasional bonus cache, I never see any sign of them except when I open the AL app. I certainly support any changes you'd like to get them out of your hair, but I would have said there's a complete absence on the web site. I've kinda gotten used to and now even appreciate that I'm not bothered by ALs when I'm geocaching. I only see them when I'm adventuring.

[+thebruce0]

There's a distinct difference between sequential ALs and free order ALs (is there a term for them? heh)

There shouldn't be any reason not to have the option to show all the stages of the free order ALs if one wants. But the former is a choice of the AL creator, not a user interface decision. If the creator wants an experience that demands the future locations remain hidden until 'discovered', then being to see those stages first is a Bad Thing for creators.

 

If someone does want to see those locations as well, their issue should be taken up with the creators of such ALs rather than the designers of the app.

 

So on that note, I certainly do agree that being able to available locations on the map, in some way, would be a very beneficial feature.  In a sense, from a UI standpoint, consider additional locations (beyond the posted location) to be treated like additional waypoints of a cache listing. And we know that currently I don't believe any app shows all public waypoints (such as trailheads and parking waypoints) on the general cache map...  I think Cachly is developing that as an option for the next major update, but I'm not positive.

[+arisoft]

1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

I don't believe any app shows all public waypoints (such as trailheads and parking waypoints) on the general cache map

 

Geocaching4 Locus does if requested including waypoint in user notes.

 

When geocaching it is very difficult to remember to stop at every AL waypoint. I missed some of them when I was geocaching and adventuring at the same time. And every time I arrived to an AL waypoint the app was closed and had to restart.

[+thebruce0]

8 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Geocaching4 Locus does if requested including waypoint in user notes.

Nice feature.

 

At one point I manually did it with Geosphere's waypoint database (app now obsolete). With all the cache data I had, I copied out all the TH and PK waypoints and saved them as independent waypoints so I could show them in the app.  Extremely useful when say, there's a clump of caches in an area and the CO didn't add any helpful details, but if one older cache nearby included trailhead and parking waypoints - there's the help. But searching through all the nearby cache listings for helpful waypoints is so tedious. This is why being able to see additional waypoints for all currently displayed icons on the map is SO beneficial!

 

And, for functionally the same reason, seeing additional Locations of an AL that aren't sequential...

[+TerraViators]

On 5/16/2021 at 12:08 AM, fizzymagic said:

 

Thanks for your deep insight.  I know I could never have figured it out on my own.

This is an arrogant response.