Coord Checker for Multi caches

[+GC_LostNFound]

Am I the only Geocacher that would like to see a "Coord Checker" implemented on Multi caches that are not at the posted coordinates?

I think it would be very beneficial to be able to check your solution in the Field just to make sure your solution is correct.  It seems that it would be as important as a checker on a Mystery Cache.

What do you think?  Neither are at the posted coords.

[+barefootjeff]

There are third party checkers that can be used (Certitude, Geocheck, etc.) or, what's often done around here, provide a checksum on the digits of the final coordinates. The latter is particularly helpful if there's no mobile data in the area so a checker would be useless anyway.

[+OusKonNé & Cétyla]

Even if third party checkers like Certitude, Geocheck, etc. already existed for Mystery/Puzzle caches, Groundspeak still introduced the notion of "Solution checker" because it is more effective.

 

For these same reasons, I agree with GC_LostNFound and I would also like to have "Solution checker" not only on Mystery/Puzzle caches, but also on Multi-Caches and even Letterbox Hybrid caches that are not at the posted coordinates.

 

Most of the time, mobile data is available, so yes it would be useful.

[+barefootjeff]

28 minutes ago, OusKonNé & Cétyla said:

Even if third party checkers like Certitude, Geocheck, etc. already existed for Mystery/Puzzle caches, Groundspeak still introduced the notion of "Solution checker" because it is more effective.

 

Bear in mind that Groundspeak's checker on mystery caches isn't visible in the official app, you have to go to the website to even see that it's there. Even the "Solution checker enabled" attribute doesn't appear in the app.

Edited November 28, 2023 by barefootjeff

[+GeoElmo6000]

Should multi-caches make you wonder if you got the coordinates right?  Shouldn't that be a mystery cache?

[+Goldenwattle]

52 minutes ago, OusKonNé & Cétyla said:

Most of the time, mobile data is available, so yes it would be useful.

That depends where in the world you live and travel too. However a checker on multicaches would be appreciated by many people. Where mobile coverage is missing, or iffy, a checksum could still be given, although this is not always a good guide to correct coordinates. Different (wrong) numbers can still add up correctly. I have a vague memory of this happening to me once.

Most urban areas are covered here, but the countryside not always. I live in Canberra.

[+arisoft]

5 hours ago, GC_LostNFound said:

Am I the only Geocacher that would like to see a "Coord Checker" implemented on Multi caches that are not at the posted coordinates?

 

Surely, you are not the only one. Current versio just doesn't fit this purpose because there is only one coordinate check possible and multi-cache may need more.

 

Basically there is someting wrong with the multi-cache if it needs a checker. My experience is that, if there is a checker in a multi-cache there will be problems.

[+Goldenwattle]

6 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

Should multi-caches make you wonder if you got the coordinates right?

Yes, often. Have you never had ambiguous question?

[+barefootjeff]

32 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Basically there is someting wrong with the multi-cache if it needs a checker. My experience is that, if there is a checker in a multi-cache there will be problems.

 

It depends on the nature of the multi. For ones with physical waypoints where each waypoint has the coordinates for the next one written on it, then sure, no need for a checker, but for the field puzzle style with virtual waypoints where you're reading stuff off signs or whatever and converting that into coordinate digits, then a checker can be handy to catch arithmetic errors or even just transposed digits. One of my early ones, GC6JMDK, has virtual waypoints on three railway stations where there are actual sums on signs that need to be done (the railways use a + sign as the decimal point on some of their signs, which is what inspired the field puzzle). I created this worksheet for it:

 

 

The intention was that searchers would print this out and fill in the digits but these days hardly anyone does that and instead will try to do it in their head while looking at the image on their phone (maybe that's why the last find was in 2020). Since getting to GZ is a T4 climb and cliff-top traverse through thick scrub, being able to confirm your answer seemed like a good idea. Maybe there's a better way to implement this such that a checker would be superfluous, but I haven't been able to figure it out.

[+Goldenwattle]

10 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

The intention was that searchers would print this out

I usually print out multies before attempting them. A  reason, if I didn't do a print out before leaving home and bring it with me, I rarely do multies while travelling. Except for the very simplest ones, too tricky while travelling, especially on a tiny GPS screen.

[+SpiritGuide]

3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Bear in mind that Groundspeak's checker on mystery caches isn't visible in the official app, you have to go to the website to even see that it's there. Even the "Solution checker enabled" attribute doesn't appear in the app.

 

But the Groundspeak checker is available in API apps so you don't have to go to the website. 

[+GC_LostNFound]

barefootjeff, I like your example with your multi-cache GC6JMDK.. Too bad more geocachers don't follow that format.

Personally, I liked the old format where the Multi caches were just that. No need for a field puzzle to get to the final. Puzzles should be left to Mystery caches rather than mixing the two. Just my 2 cents worth.

[+barefootjeff]

4 minutes ago, GC_LostNFound said:

barefootjeff, I like your example with your multi-cache GC6JMDK.. Too bad more geocachers don't follow that format.

Personally, I liked the old format where the Multi caches were just that. No need for a field puzzle to get to the final. Puzzles should be left to Mystery caches rather than mixing the two. Just my 2 cents worth.

 

Thanks. For me, it's horses for courses. If the location works well with physical waypoints then I tend to go that route, although one of my more recent ones (GC9M6X5) is a bit of a hybrid in that the object at the listed coordinates contains the field puzzle which you need to note down (or photograph) and then use the clues at the other three physical waypoints to obtain the final coordinates. It's nearly two years old and hasn't been overly popular with just 13 finds, but 12 of them gave it an FP so I guess those that like that sort of thing enjoyed it.

 

The other place I've often used multis is where the main attractions are in a national park at spots where it would be difficult to get permission for anything physical, so the waypoints in the park are virtual and provide the digits for the final's coordinates located just outside the park. On one of them, I was even able to put the final inside the park, adjacent to the picnic area, but the waypoints along a formal walking track still had to be virtual because of the proximity to Aboriginal sites.

[+Goldenwattle]

3 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Surely, you are not the only one. Current versio just doesn't fit this purpose because there is only one coordinate check possible and multi-cache may need more.

 

Basically there is someting wrong with the multi-cache if it needs a checker. My experience is that, if there is a checker in a multi-cache there will be problems.

What sort of multicaches are you used to? Here most seem to be get information from a sign or count something and put that into a formular to get the next WP. A few are disks with the next WP printed on it, but they are not common. Here is one of my multicaches and its simple formulars. GC7AGE1

Not all multicaches have such simple formulars though. Here is one from another CO's multicache:

A checker for the final for multicaches would be good. People can make mistakes with their maths.

[+fizzymagic]

2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Not all multicaches have such simple formulars though. Here is one from another CO's multicache:

A checker for the final for multicaches would be good. People can make mistakes with their maths.

 

Your example demonstrates that there are bad multicaches out there, not the need for an HQ-endorsed checker.

 

I love math, but requiring that to be done in the field makes it bad.  I don't want HQ encouraging that kind of behavior.

 

Certitude works just fine for multicache stages.

[+arisoft]

4 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

A checker for the final for multicaches would be good. People can make mistakes with their maths.

 

Indeeed, there are some multi-caches with errors in formulas. CO should fix those formulas instead of adding a checker.

 

Anything that encourages COs to make their multi-caches more like a guesswork puzzle is not good. The native checker is the worst option, just because it is hidden on field where the victim shoud be able to be warned about the nature of the cache.

[+Goldenwattle]

15 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Indeeed, there are some multi-caches with errors in formulas. CO should fix those formulas instead of adding a checker.

I'm more worried about making a maths mistake, not that the formulas is wrong, as so far I have never found that for a multi.

 

I have though had the checker being wrong for a puzzle.

[+Hynz]

50 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Indeeed, there are some multi-caches with errors in formulas. CO should fix those formulas instead of adding a checker.

 

Anything that encourages COs to make their multi-caches more like a guesswork puzzle is not good. The native checker is the worst option, just because it is hidden on field where the victim shoud be able to be warned about the nature of the cache.

 

9 hours ago, arisoft said:

Basically there is someting wrong with the multi-cache if it needs a checker. My experience is that, if there is a checker in a multi-cache there will be problems.

Exactly! I love Multis and yes, unfortunately some owner have ambigous questions which makes me longing for some way of confirmation that I'm on the right track. But that happens more often during processing along the stages and not just at the end when calculating the final coordinates. So just a checker for the finals would often be no remedy.

But I admit I once followed a Multi where the owner managed to construct a checker (certainly not the GC-Checker) which helped me along the stages.

[+arisoft]

7 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I have though had the checker being wrong for a puzzle.

 

I have made many mystery puzzle caches without a checker. Deciding, whether the solution is correct or not, is a part of the puzzle. Here is an example https://coord.info/GC7X78J

 

One idea behind this approach is that the cache is more rewarding for finders who know how the puzzle was solved and more exiting for those who don't.

 

Edited November 29, 2023 by arisoft

[+Goldenwattle]

43 minutes ago, arisoft said:

https://coord.info/GC7X78J

LOL, not for me that one...

 

Actually I don't do that many puzzles.