Where are the multicaches with physical stages?

[+granskog123]

When i started geocaching 7 years ago someone had hidden a favourite point-worthy cache series near where i lived. Thanks to the owner I was able to find my first multi and letterbox. For years I associated multis with fun adventures and physical stages and have since then hidden a few myself. Now years later when looking at nearby multis most of them are “count how many of this and that” type of virtual multicaches, even in the woods. I totally understand their place, I really do, but I don’t understand why multicaches with physical stages are so rare. “Physical” multicaches can have a puzzle or a story and you don’t have to do math to complete them. Much more fun.

Any thoughts on this?

How popular are “physical” multicaches in your area?

[+HuggableHamster]

6 minutes ago, granskog123 said:

 

How popular are “physical” multicaches in your area?

Honestly I have, I believe, done two physical multicaches, and that was a way a way one on the Isle of Man the other in Rome - so I would have to say very unpopular on a placing them front!  I did enjoy finding them both.

 

At a guess they are not very popular with hiders because I bet people who don’t read the description try to log a find on the physical stage, if you are in an area with a high density of caches an extra physical way point could be hard to find space for (certainly I wouldn’t think about setting one with physical waypoints as in many places it would feel like taking up space that could be used for another cache) also depending on what your physical stage is it could involve a lot more maintenance.  I think also a lot of people near me certainly often use multi caches as a way to take you to a place that is important but hard to place a cache at hence the read the plaque, do the maths, find the cache, off-set multis.

[+edexter]

     They are rare because they require far more planning, time and effort to place and maintain and also involve a hike of a mile or two.  As you have noticed, If you drill down into what are called "multis", you will find nearly all of them are actually "couples":  Go to a sign in a park, read it, solve a field puzzle (stage one) and walk two hundred feet to the cache (stage two).  I actively place multi-stage caches of various types and my typical 6 plus stage multi requires about ten times the effort to place and maintain as a single stage or couples cache.  The great majority of cachers would prefer to get six virtual smilies than one and prefer a power trail of 10 caches placed .1m apart along a rail trail or bike path over a cross country hike in the woods.  

Without looking any deeper into why this is: if one assumes that folks place exactly the type of cache they like to find, one concludes they prefer simple and easy, over harder and more complex.  Quantity over quality.

     In my area, physical multicaches are popular in the sense there are a lot of them, and they get a lot of favorite points, but that's just because I put out a lot of them.  Almost all the other "multis" in the area are "couples"

edexter

[+barefootjeff]

In my state (New South Wales, Australia), the National Parks and Wildlife Service's geocaching policy requires formal approval for physical caches in their parks but allows (and encourages) virtual caches and waypoints without approval, so often virtual-stage multis are used to bring cachers to interesting places in the parks, with the physical cache located just outside the park boundary. All the multis in my Chasing Waterfalls series are like that, although for one I did end up getting permission to place the final in the park near the picnic area as I couldn't find anywhere suitable outside the park boundary for it.

 

I also own six multis with physical waypoints (two now archived) and am currently working on another which I hope to submit next week. Most use themed objects with a laminated card attached showing the coordinates for the next stage, but my most recently published one (GC9M6X5 hidden in January) is a bit different, with a field puzzle glued to the underside of a rock tucked into a crevice at the listed coordinates and the remaining three waypoints (painted rocks placed inside honeycombed caves) bearing the slightly cryptic clues needed to solve it. That one has been mostly shunned by the local community, with just five finds in almost a year and three of those from outside the region, which is a bit disappointing as the location with its impressive caves and breath-taking views really deserves a good cache.

 

The new one I'm working on goes back to the tried-and-proven laminated cards on themed objects approach, but has a similar D/T rating to GC9M6X5 so I'll be curious to see if it's any more or less popular. But these days, it seems the community here only wants to do quick P&G traditionals and will ignore anything much more than a 2/2.

 

[+baer2006]

Multis with physical stages can easily become maintenance nightmares and they get significantly fewer visits than series of traditionals. The third cache I placed was a walk in the forst with 6 stages + final. It's been archived for a while now, but in the end it was almost more maintenance than find logs . Not only muggles (humans and animals), but also forest workers harvesting trees. In the end it's lot of work for the CO, with little "reward" in the form of finders.

 

Such multis were much more popular when I started caching in 2008. What "killed" them IMHO was the cancellation of the "anti-trail guideline" (when I started, it wasn't allowed to publish a trail of traditionals - the reviewer would tell you to place a multi instead).

[+niraD]

36 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

Such multis were much more popular when I started caching in 2008. What "killed" them IMHO was the cancellation of the "anti-trail guideline" (when I started, it wasn't allowed to publish a trail of traditionals - the reviewer would tell you to place a multi instead).

Yes, there was a time when the volunteer reviewers would ask a CO to merge a series of related traditional caches into a single multi-cache. They haven't been encouraged/allowed to do that for years.

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

Such multis were much more popular when I started caching in 2008. What "killed" them IMHO was the cancellation of the "anti-trail guideline" (when I started, it wasn't allowed to publish a trail of traditionals - the reviewer would tell you to place a multi instead).

 

With most of my physical waypoint multis, the waypoints and final are too close together to have been done as a trail of traditionals. In the case of GC9M6X5, where those waypoints have visible coordinates, the saturation map looks like this:

 

 

The final (not shown) is also in there along the yellow track. It might have just been possible to have created a power trail of two traditionals there if I'd put one of them at the parking coordinates.

[+hzoi]

We have quite a few multis around northern Virginia with physical stages throughout. Several are in the same wonderful park system along the Bull Run/Occoquan Trail. I'm still working on an 18 mile long, 13-stage multi. Now that my foot is mostly back from surgery, it's about time to close that one out.

 

Of course, we also have several multis on the opposite end of the spectrum, which are entirely virtual, from back when that was allowed. Like this one.

Edited November 30, 2022 by hzoi

[+AbacoRick]

I agree with edexter.   I have one multi-cache in play right now with three physical stages in one fairly large park.  I am tempted to archive it and re-apply with 3 separate physical caches just because my activity level on this one is so low compared to my other traditional hides.    I put a good deal of effort in it, and the final is a quasi-gadget cache so I was hoping it would be a simple intro to multi-caches with a decent payoff in a very nice park.   I have had several claim finds but all they did was find Stage 1 and there is no log to sign there, only a strip of paper with coordinates.   So when I DO get notice of a logged find, if they don't comment on multiple stages, I usually message them and ask about the condition of the final.  Sometimes they admit they only found the first stage.  I educate them and move on.  I don't delete their find if they are newbies, though I know I could.

 

[+mustakorppi]

I have to think the extra maintenance work isn't great for the CO to begin with, and the feedback from finders who get halfway thru a multi before DNFing a physical waypoint can be pretty salty.

 

And I can imagine it must be extra demotivating to have finders trade coordinates and go directly to the final container on a physical multi. Whichalso turns into a negative feedback loop as it's misleading to everyone trying to do the multi properly. It has taken me way too long to realize that no one who's logged a find in recent years has actually found the waypoint I've been searching for in vain...

[+vw_k]

It's been a long time since I found a multi cache that involved multiple containers or physical stages, around here "read the sign and do the maths" type offsets are very much the norm.

 

Extra maintenance compared to virtual stages and trails of traditionals being an alternative (with the resulting higher find count) are going to be factors.

 

However offset caches with a virtual first stage do have their place. I see a lot of them starting at points of interest within town/village centres where there may not be suitable hiding places nearby, (A church or other historic building, plaque, statue etc). The co-ordinates will then take you slightly out of town to a location where a container can be hidden. This solves 2 problems when creating a geocache, urban places of interest with no suitable hiding places nearby and suitable hiding places which may not be of particular interest on their own. Combine the two and you have a worthwhile geocache.

[+thebruce0]

I FTF'd a series of 10 roadside multis impromptu while I was heading to Buffalo. Got notifications for a slew of new published, discovered they were literally a couple of minutes ahead of me. Looked at them, and noticed they were all low DT. I was closest to the 'end' of the series, but they were literally go-to-posted, get redirect to final, 161m down the road. The final had the redirect for the next one in the series. 161m farther, sign it. Do that for the series. In a sense I was lucky I started at the end cache because #10's final was the container at #1.  So I FTF'd 10 multis within a few minutes.

I ain't complaining.

But, multis can still be anything, even if they're the "shortest multi in the world" with 2 halves of a pill holder with a log in one and a redirect in the other. But I'd say those are the exception

 

I agree with earlier comments. Multis are less common because they both require more maintenance (especially for multiple stages where if one breaks, it's technically all-or-nothing for 1 smiley), and they're a lot more work for *ahem* one smiley; and with the gc culture leaning towards faster-is-better instant smiley gratification, well they're just not as desirable.  Unfortunately.

[+barefootjeff]

8 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

I agree with earlier comments. Multis are less common because they both require more maintenance (especially for multiple stages where if one breaks, it's technically all-or-nothing for 1 smiley), and they're a lot more work for *ahem* one smiley; and with the gc culture leaning towards faster-is-better instant smiley gratification, well they're just not as desirable.  Unfortunately.

 

Yes, they can require more maintenance but this can be at least minimised by designing the waypoint objects to be rugged and well-concealed. My earliest physical waypoint multi was GC664DZ, which had four waypoints placed along an unnamed creek, leading from a small beach along a track up past a series of waterfalls to the final (a 2 litre Sistema) tucked under a rock ledge near the base of the top falls. The waypoint objects were all themed to the cache's story (The Lost Sheriff of Middle Sea County), starting with the remains of a campfire (the object there was a charred log with the coordinates of the next stage engraved underneath), then various things the sheriff discarded (a horseshoe, the gaolhouse key, his pistol and finally his badge) as he switched sides to team up with the bushranger.

 

It only got 20 finds in its six years of life but those who took it on seemed to enjoy it, with 11 FPs received. It had some problems early on, with the second waypoint muggled soon after publication (I then moved it to a more secure location where it was fine), the third waypoint washing away a couple of times in floods (I replaced it with something a lot heavier and put it under a rock) and some campers defecating along the lower reaches of the creek, but it eventually settled down and was maintenance-free until two years of almost constant rain obliterated the track with land slips and fallen trees and the first waypoint got swallowed up by the undergrowth. In the end, its archival became inevitable.

 

The general rule seems to be that multis like this get few finds but a high FP percentage, require a lot of work to set up and regular visits to make sure everything is okay (it's a good idea to put them close to home and somewhere you like visiting). But for me, I'd much rather have a few of those than a power trail of mediocre traditionals.

[+thebruce0]

5 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Yes, they can require more maintenance but this can be at least minimised by designing the waypoint objects to be rugged and well-concealed.

Oh of course, but I'm just reiterating the sentiment. Multis, all things being equal, require more maintenance per smiley, because if one 'stage' has an issue, the whole thing could be dud. So it becomes a value judgment to the CO - is it worth the extra potential maintenance to bring geocachers through the whole experience? Especially knowing that many people (this may be regional) will just pass around final coordinates these days instead of doing multis in full because 'it's so much work' even if it's reportedly a really great multi (we see that around here often with the oodles of copy/paste "this was my day" logs from group caching each saying nothing about the actual cache)...  Heck if a group of friends does an Earthcache, around here one person does the work and everyone claims so-and-so is sending in answers for the group. Piggyback Earthcaching. The only thing such people get from an EC are (hopefully at least) seeing a beautiful location. But that's not what an Earthcache is supposed to do, otherwise it'd be a virtual waypoint. Or a tourist recommendation. And if a CO wants every person to send in answers, they're the bad guy.

Community sentiment really is just leaning more and more to easy-smiley-town, both in finding and in owning.

[+barefootjeff]

5 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

Community sentiment really is just leaning more and more to easy-smiley-town, both in finding and in owning.

 

I guess I'm bucking the trend (or trying to) as I just submitted a new multi for publication. It has three physical waypoints, in addition to the final, each themed to the storyline of The Headless Horseman's Head. It's been a long time in development, going back to July when I first visited a location that inspired the theme. In October I got as far as submitting it but was caught out by a puzzle cache I'd solved and found in 2015 that was sitting in almost the same spot (the listed coordinates are a couple of kilometres away and I'd completely forgotten about it). I subsequently found another spot where something similar would work, made a few tweaks to the story and added a "ghost horse" waypoint that lee737 graciously 3D-printed for me. I got the reviewer to do a coordinates check a couple of weeks ago so hopefully this time it'll go through.

 

 

I'm not expecting any great community response, as it's a terrain 3 hike to visit the waypoints and get to the final, and it isn't the sort of place that visitors to the region are likely to go. I expect it'll be much like my previous multi and just get a couple of finds early on then languish, but hopefully anyone who does take it on will enjoy the experience and the bit of new territory it's in. The waypoint placements should be well clear of muggle eyes so it ought to require minimal maintenance, but in any case it's not far from home and close to a couple of my other caches so I'll be keeping a regular eye on it.

[+edexter]

My view of the proliferation of P&Gs and power trails is shaped by Gresham's Law as it relates to "smilies". 

(Gresham's law is a monetary principle stating that "bad money drives out good."   Gresham’s law was originally based on the composition of minted coins and the value of the precious metals used in them.  As coins were "debased" by having less and less of the precious metal, the good coins would go out of circulation and be replaced by the inferior ones, which had the same "value").

Since the primary "currency" in Geocaching are "finds" or "smilies" and a six stage multi that takes a couple of hours has the same "value" as a 20 second P&G, the debasement of "the smilie" was inevitable.  Folks who place and hunt hiking multis are literally playing the game using a different currency , namely the experience of being outdoors in an interesting and challenging environment and the coins used here are time spent and "Favorite Points".  (Shortcuts to "the final" such as those thebruce0 mentions for multis and earthcaches are similar to the time saving poorer caching experience provided by "quick and easy" finds:  to extend the metaphor, this is equivalent to "coin clipping")  It is notable that the Fav Pts are "awarded" to the CO for the cache experience, not to the hunter.  

[+barefootjeff]

On 12/3/2022 at 10:20 PM, barefootjeff said:

I got the reviewer to do a coordinates check a couple of weeks ago so hopefully this time it'll go through.

 

It did and was published yesterday morning (GCA25XJ). After 3 finds, it's already had a DNF from someone who couldn't find one of the waypoints (they didn't say which one so not a very helpful log), so I ducked across this morning just to make sure everything was still okay and it was. There's a reason this cache has a D3 rating as I didn't want the waypoints or final to be conspicuous to passing muggles, although the hints are pretty explicit. Part of the territory that goes with owning physical waypoint multis is making sure everything remains hidden the way you want it, so they're not for everyone but it's something I enjoy doing, particularly now that I'm retired from work.

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 11/29/2022 at 1:54 PM, granskog123 said:

“Physical” multicaches can have a puzzle or a story and you don’t have to do math to complete them. Much more fun.

 

I prefer the offset multis and walking tour multis because they usually take me to interesting places.

 

All-physical multis pose a question: why? What is the point of taking someone to 5 or 10 or 20 physical containers within a single cache?

 

There can be good reasons. Thematic ones. Deliberately reducing the number of seekers, perhaps as a compromise with the land manager. Perhaps there is a very good reason to force seekers to walk a particular trail in a particular direction with the stages as waypoints. 

 

However, these good reasons are rare. And that's before the planning, preparation, and maintenance requirements others have pointed out.

 

All the examples I can think of in Florida are "epic" caches that have high D/T ratings and require much of the day to complete. Long hikes, swamp tromps, culvert spelunking, or similar. They are popular milestone caches and usually done in a group, but are sought infrequently because of the preparations required. 

 

On 11/29/2022 at 5:05 PM, niraD said:

Yes, there was a time when the volunteer reviewers would ask a CO to merge a series of related traditional caches into a single multi-cache. They haven't been encouraged/allowed to do that for years.

 

That requirement was dropped over a decade ago. I suspect that, much like the "wow factor" requirement that Virtuals had for a time, it was causing endless arguments with and headaches for the Reviewers. It became much simpler to simply make the 528-ft proximity guideline, which already existed, into an absolute rule rather than one that had a lot of judgement calls associated with it.

[+niraD]

40 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

What is the point of taking someone to 5 or 10 or 20 physical containers within a single cache?

Because it's your 54th birthday?

[+thebruce0]

On 12/3/2022 at 6:20 AM, barefootjeff said:

I guess I'm bucking the trend (or trying to) as I just submitted a new multi for publication.

See "Community sentiment", "leaning towards" - you and I and others are likely not part of this leaning. Mine was a comment about the general global community.

So keep bucking the trend, indeed.

 

I just placed a simple and classic night-cache multi; firetacks from the TH to a creative GZ. Around here years ago night caches - true night caches - were a huge trend. That's slowed down greatly, and there a number of us who miss them. We had an annual night caching event - like, all night geocaching. Caches got high tech with night-themed content, tools and tasks. The work required to create caches and host the event was enormous, and typically worth it, but people needed a break. And now many of those night caches are either falling to disrepair needing more attentive maintenance, or people just don't do them the way they're intended; either during daylight (ruining the experience) or just getting the finals. Then the pandemic hit just as the crew was aiming to launch it again.  Next year we're hoping to bring it back, and maybe re-spark some more excitement for the style.  (caches placed for these events were typically multi/mystery or gadgety trads).

 

 

2 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

On 11/29/2022 at 5:05 PM, niraD said:

Yes, there was a time when the volunteer reviewers would ask a CO to merge a series of related traditional caches into a single multi-cache. They haven't been encouraged/allowed to do that for years.

 

That requirement was dropped over a decade ago. I suspect that, much like the "wow factor" requirement that Virtuals had for a time, it was causing endless arguments with and headaches for the Reviewers. It became much simpler to simply make the 528-ft proximity guideline, which already existed, into an absolute rule rather than one that had a lot of judgement calls associated with it.

 

Yeah power trails were like that, but the arguments over arbitrary distances and exceptions and differing judgment calls (and reviewer appeals to 'no precedent') became a pain to manage. Easier to make distinct definitions and just point to those universally... 0.1 mile proximity, and cache type definitions. Love it/hate it, that essentially gave the green light to 0.1mile gap power trails, but stopped debates about whether multis, or series of trads, were appropriate.

[+cerberus1]

On 11/29/2022 at 1:54 PM, granskog123 said:

When i started geocaching 7 years ago someone had hidden a favourite point-worthy cache series near where i lived. Thanks to the owner I was able to find my first multi and letterbox. For years I associated multis with fun adventures and physical stages and have since then hidden a few myself. 

 - skip - 

Any thoughts on this?   How popular are “physical” multicaches in your area?

 

I don't think we've seen a "physical" multi cache like you describe in some time.  Maybe some SW of us...

In the beginning I thought you may be talking about actual physical stages, and for some time those we've seen a lot.

- All have that "physical" container telling us where to go next... after climbing a tree, crawl into a hole/crevice, etc.

A lot had maintenance issues, stages missing/damaged mostly, and more than half we've started were never completed (archived by CO...).

Container issues might be a reason some COs no longer places physical stages... 

[+barefootjeff]

7 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

All-physical multis pose a question: why? What is the point of taking someone to 5 or 10 or 20 physical containers within a single cache?

 

There can be good reasons. Thematic ones. Deliberately reducing the number of seekers, perhaps as a compromise with the land manager. Perhaps there is a very good reason to force seekers to walk a particular trail in a particular direction with the stages as waypoints. 

 

However, these good reasons are rare. And that's before the planning, preparation, and maintenance requirements others have pointed out.

 

All the examples I can think of in Florida are "epic" caches that have high D/T ratings and require much of the day to complete. Long hikes, swamp tromps, culvert spelunking, or similar. They are popular milestone caches and usually done in a group, but are sought infrequently because of the preparations required.

 

For my multi GC9M6X5, published in January, the location became available after a 2012 traditional on the headland was archived by its owner late last year following a bushfire hazard reduction burn-off that destroyed his container, thus freeing up the area for a new cache. He set me the challenge of creating that new cache and the multi is what I came up with.

 

The headland is a beautiful spot, with breath-taking views over the surrounding waterways from the top and a series of large wind-eroded sandstone caves on the lower level, so I opted for a multi in order to showcase as much of it as I could. The headland isn't big enough to support multiple traditonals so that wasn't an option. The multi I came up with is a bit unusual, in that all the physical waypoints have visible coordinates and there's no need to visit them in any particular order. At the listed coordinates is the "keystone" which shows how to use what you find at the other waypoints to determine the coordinates of the final.

 

 

The cache has been well received by the five cachers who've taken it on but it's probably unlikely to ever reach the lofty heights of a double-digit find count.

 

My other reason for creating physical waypoint multis is to tell a story. My most recent one (GCA25XJ), published a couple of days ago, has waypoint objects that relate to the tale in the description and take the searcher on a journey to discover the whereabouts of the Headless Horseman's head. The trail through bushland on Kincumba Mountain has some nice views and rock formations, with the final's location fitting in well with the story and the themed container. Again, apart from the waypoints being too close to each other, this is something that really wouldn't work as a series of traditonals. My caches are much more about the journey than the smiley at the end of it, with the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

Edited December 5, 2022 by barefootjeff

[+granskog123]

On 12/5/2022 at 2:14 PM, JL_HSTRE said:

What is the point of taking someone to 5 or 10 or 20 physical containers within a single cache?

20 stages? I my area multicaches has like one or two stages, even ”virtual” ones. 
I have to agree though, there are no reason to make a multicache with 10-20 physical containers if the locations are 161 M apart  (unless there is a specific reason). But l dont agree that the reasons for creating a physical multicache are rare. Like I said, multis can have puzzles, or a theme, like you said. For me, an multicache with a creative container is my favourite multi. This is one of my favourites: a 2 stage multi with the theme “surveillance”. Stage 1 is near a lake and the final is at the other side of the lake.

[+barefootjeff]

3 hours ago, granskog123 said:

I have to agree though, there are no reason to make a multicache with 10-20 physical containers if the locations are 161 M apart  (unless there is a specific reason)

 

It's not quite the same thing, I know, but I think the same principle applies. There's an EarthCache I did a couple of years ago that consists of 11 waypoints spread along 2km of coastline, with each waypoint showing one aspect of the site's geological evolution. Sure, it could have been done as 11 separate ECs, giving the finders 11 smileys instead of just one, but to my mind at least, that would have been a much poorer experience. The single EC is all or nothing, if you want to do it you have to do all of it, no just cherry-picking the easy bits, and that makes completing it a much more rewarding and memorable experience. It's multi-stage caches like this that will stick in my mind long after the trails of traditionals have been forgotten.

[+niraD]

5 hours ago, granskog123 said:

I have to agree though, there are no reason to [do something]  (unless there is a specific reason).

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this one...

[+granskog123]

7 hours ago, niraD said:

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this one...

?

[+hzoi]

8 hours ago, granskog123 said:

16 hours ago, niraD said:

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this one...

?

 

Well, that's basically what you said.

 

21 hours ago, granskog123 said:

I have to agree though, there [is] no reason to make a multicache with 10-20 physical containers if the locations are 161 M apart  (unless there is a specific reason).

 

So there is no reason to do X, unless there is a specific reason to do X.

 

A specific reason can be, a cache owner specifically wanted to make a 10-20 stage multi, with the containers up to 161 meters apart. And now, because there is a specific reason, there is a reason. N'est-ce pas?

[+baer2006]

15 minutes ago, hzoi said:

So there is no reason to do X, unless there is a specific reason to do X.

Cool, abstract logic - I like nerdy stuff . We can further reduce this to "There is no A, unless there is an A", which is true for any A , incl. A = "reason to do X".

[+hzoi]

29 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

I like nerdy stuff

 

I think there is an argument that all geocachers like nerdy stuff to some degree, given the nature of our shared activity.

 

I still kick myself for not starting caching earlier. I'd heard of it when it was newer, but dismissed it because it sounded like it was for nerds. Which completely ignores the fact that I AM A NERD. I went to school for seven years so that I can be paid for my capacity for abstract thought.

 

(At least I changed my opinion and started caching while we still had a few years left to live in Germany the first time, so I really only missed out on geocaching in Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq.)

 

OK - we're getting off topic, so before I have to have my moderator alter ego warn myself, I'll stop here.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

18 minutes ago, hzoi said:

 

I think there is an argument that all geocachers like nerdy stuff to some degree, given the nature of our shared activity.

 

I still kick myself for not starting caching earlier. I'd heard of it when it was newer, but dismissed it because it sounded like it was for nerds. Which completely ignores the fact that I AM A NERD. I went to school for seven years so that I can be paid for my capacity for abstract thought.

 

(At least I changed my opinion and started caching while we still had a few years left to live in Germany the first time, so I really only missed out on geocaching in Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq.)

 

OK - we're getting off topic, so before I have to have my moderator alter ego warn myself, I'll stop here.

 

(Self-)OUTED!!!???

 

Or am I the only dim-witted one here that didn't already know this?

[+hzoi]

18 minutes ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

(Self-)OUTED!!!???

 

LOL. Not really. I linked my caching profile on my reviewer/moderator profile a couple months after I started reviewing, for the sake of transparency.

 

But I'd like to think that the main reason people look at that profile is my pretty color map of geoaware responsibility in the US. (It's the only reason I go to it, because even I forget.)

[+granskog123]

1 hour ago, hzoi said:

 

Well, that's basically what you said.

 

 

So there is no reason to do X, unless there is a specific reason to do X.

 

A specific reason can be, a cache owner specifically wanted to make a 10-20 stage multi, with the containers up to 161 meters apart. And now, because there is a specific reason, there is a reason. N'est-ce pas?

Ok, got it . I guess my argument doesn’t really make sense. Guess I’m trying to say that you shouldn’t try to put as many containers/locations into the same multicache “just because” if they are better split up. But like others have commented so could there be many reasons for doing so.

Maybe my goal for 2023 should be to find one of those 20 stage multicaches….

[+egroeg]

In a large county park near me are 10 multi caches.

3 of them are the "read a historical marker to determine the coords for the final" type

1 is an offset cache of a few hundred yards

1 is a 2-stage cache where, at the first stage, you pick up a tool for the gadget cache final.  Short walk

4 of them are 2 or 3 physical stages, with a walk of a mile or more.

1 is a 10 stage, 12-mile ordeal that follows the perimeter of the park.

 

Multis with physical stages are common in the other county parks, but the marker type is more common in the urban center of the county, including several that take you on neighborhood tours to get info from the many murals.

Seems to be plenty of interest in all kinds of multis around here.

[+dprovan]

9 hours ago, hzoi said:

Which completely ignores the fact that I AM A NERD.

Well, except it wasn't cool to be a nerd back in 2000. Only people that already accepted that they were nerds were willing to act like nerds. But, actually, for the first 10 years or so, I think it was mostly outdoor enthusiasts that did geocaching, so that wasn't your traditional nerds.

7 hours ago, granskog123 said:

I guess my argument doesn’t really make sense.

It didn't technically make sense, but I think niraD was just picking on you. I think we all understood what you were saying even though it came out organically illogical...well, actually it's tautological, which is actually the epitome of logical, since we're all nerds here.

[+hzoi]

11 hours ago, dprovan said:

21 hours ago, hzoi said:

Which completely ignores the fact that I AM A NERD.

Well, except it wasn't cool to be a nerd back in 2000. Only people that already accepted that they were nerds were willing to act like nerds. But, actually, for the first 10 years or so, I think it was mostly outdoor enthusiasts that did geocaching, so that wasn't your traditional nerds.

 

Added irony, I was an outdoorsy nerd at the time. I spent a lot of my spare time hiking and/or looking for Southwest ghost towns and other abandoned historical spots to photograph. What the Germans would call "lost places."

 

19 hours ago, granskog123 said:

Guess I’m trying to say that you shouldn’t try to put as many containers/locations into the same multicache “just because” if they are better split up. But like others have commented so could there be many reasons for doing so.

 

I know, I was just being silly.

 

And in full disclosure: of the 250 or so caches we have hidden, only 8 have been multis, the last of which was hidden in 2014. 6 of those had virtual stages. The other two had 4 or 5 stages total, but they were both less than a 3 km walk. So, it seems I don't have much reason to make long multis with physical stages. 

[+baer2006]

23 hours ago, hzoi said:

Added irony, I was an outdoorsy nerd at the time. I spent a lot of my spare time hiking and/or looking for Southwest ghost towns and other abandoned historical spots to photograph. What the Germans would call "lost places."

Yes, we Germans seem particularly susceptible to such pseudo-anglicisms .

 

But anyway, such abandoned sites are quite on topic in a thread about multis with physical stages. Some of the coolest caches I have done were in sich places(*), where you had to roam around to find certain artifacts placed by the CO. Often one find would reveal what to search next, and in the end you received coordinates for the container (which typically was outside the site). Not your classic "walk in the woods" multi, of course .

Needless to say, such caches were usually only semi-legal (**), and nowadays it's almost impossible to get something like this past the reviewer (basically, the CO must actually own the site).

 

(*) Including my all-time favorite, GC6Z4NP

(**) Technically illegal. But either nobody cared at all, or the worst thing you risked (when someone does care and you are unlucky enough to get caught in the act) was that your name and address are recorded, and you are escorted off the premises. No prosecution, when it's clear that you are "only" playing and not stealing etc.

 

[+hzoi]

53 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

(*) Including my all-time favorite, GC6Z4NP

 

I wish I had known about that one, I would have hunted it the second time we lived in Germany. Alas.

 

My three favorite Lost Place multis (all, sadly, archived) are still Alcatraz (a tour of an abandoned immigration detention facility), Freddy Kruegers Grab (a tour of an abandoned US installation), and of course Fort Apokalypse (Mandatory Suicide) (a tour of abandoned Westwall fortifications, including a 1 km long tunnel).

 

(At least two of those are on topic, as they featured physical stages. Though it looks like the physical stages I found for Fort Apokalypse were stolen and gradually edited out.)

[+GearHeadAZ]

I've only ever done a couple multis and they were because they had high FPs and just two stages. One had the second final coordinates hidden in a very clever way. Another one had a PVC faux telescope which directed you to the final. I've never placed my own because I know they would get less finds, but I do plan on hiding one in the near future.

[+Mysterion604]

On 11/29/2022 at 1:26 PM, baer2006 said:

Multis with physical stages can easily become maintenance nightmares and they get significantly fewer visits than series of traditionals. The third cache I placed was a walk in the forst with 6 stages + final. It's been archived for a while now, but in the end it was almost more maintenance than find logs . Not only muggles (humans and animals), but also forest workers harvesting trees. In the end it's lot of work for the CO, with little "reward" in the form of finders.

 

Such multis were much more popular when I started caching in 2008. What "killed" them IMHO was the cancellation of the "anti-trail guideline" (when I started, it wasn't allowed to publish a trail of traditionals - the reviewer would tell you to place a multi instead).

 

 

This is what I have assumed. Harder to get approval for (multiple coordinates to keep distant from other caches), and harder to maintain since it can end up unsolvable if a stage goes missing. (In fact, quite a few older multis I have attempted seem to have missing stages that interfere with completing it.) 

 

As I have one such multi in the development stages, I have considered this issue a lot, and it is daunting.

 

[+Chipper3]

I like to "build" caches that have story lines and create a cohesive experience  for the finders.  I enjoy all the pre- work and planning that goes into multi-caches and the maintainence and enhancement is as enjoyable to me as searching  and finding caches.  Back a million yeas ago, I was into model trains and the fun , for me, was in planning a layout and then building the layout with all the trestles and scenery, etc.  Then running the trains was a different phase and provided different rewards.  

So, I guess it takes a special type of person that approaches true multi-caches as I approached train layouts.  In an "instant pudding", "point and click", "channel surfing" world, "Park and Grabs"do not fit the  model train approach and as a result fewer and fewer epic adventures come into existence. 

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, Chipper3 said:

I like to "build" caches that have story lines and create a cohesive experience  for the finders.  I enjoy all the pre- work and planning that goes into multi-caches and the maintainence and enhancement is as enjoyable to me as searching  and finding caches.

 

Me too. The two multis I've created this year (GC9M6X5 and GCA25XJ) involved a lot of preparation of the themed waypoint objects and final container as well as exploring the area and finding suitable locations for them. I spent over a hundred dollars in the local hardware store buying all the stuff I needed to put the first one together, although a lot of that, like grinding bits, adhesives, paints and lacquers, I can reuse in future projects. They're both in nice spots that I enjoy revisiting to do routine checks.and will often just go for a walk there if the weather's nice and I feel like stretching my legs. Like many of my hides, they've had few finds (5 and 4 respectively) so most of the enjoyment I get from them is pre-publication and it's almost a bit of a let-down when they finally go live and the FTF has been and gone.