What is Types of caches to you prefer hunting?

[+Clan Ferguson]

I ask this because My first cache ,Thicken Orange Juice, is a short Multi that has been hidden since Sept. 4 2001 and has only been found about 12 times and last one was more then a month ago. I want to hide a couple more but I don't want them to go as unnoticed as my first one. I am pretty sure there is no lack of cachers in this area. So I am not sure if it is geographic location, name of the cache, or type of cache.

 

I am betting on cache type, So what type do you prefer to hunt?

 

Cache On!!

 

James

"Big Dog"

-Clan Ferguson

[+infosponge]

Mostly I like the single ones...if there's a good hunt involved (either distance or really nice location). If it's just a park and grab...ugh.

Multi's are fun as a chance of pace.

I made a very hard multi and finally archived it last week because only three people took the time to find it. The location was kind of far for a lot of the "locals" and it was taking people hours (or hours over multiple days) to find it, and I just don't think that many people are willing to put in the time on something like that. I may re-do the same concept at park that's closer to the population centers to get more people out there.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

I don't care for multi's a bit. Not my thing. I haven't done one yet although I will give it a try eventually.

 

My favorites are those than have a fun hike. Maybe a mile or more with the reward of a good view afterwards. Now if cachers would put in the parking area coordinates life would be perfect!!

 

Never Squat With Yer Spurs On

[+craggy (nightcrawler)]

I would prefer a multi-cache over a single cache. There is just not enough people interested in multi's. Done right they can be more of a challenge because you are going into the second stage a little more blinded. There is alot of singles that I have done that have been a blast it's just the park-n-grab ones that personnaly I don't like. Just my .02

[+craggy (nightcrawler)]

I would prefer a multi-cache over a single cache. There is just not enough people interested in multi's. Done right they can be more of a challenge because you are going into the second stage a little more blinded. There is alot of singles that I have done that have been a blast it's just the park-n-grab ones that personnaly I don't like. Just my .02

[+Markwell]

(Side note: I've been meaning to get over to Thicken for a while, just haven't had the time!)

 

Single stages offer great introduction to newbies. Single stages are what are hit on cache-a-thon jaunts where you swoop into an area to find as many as possible. Single stages are what people that are only in the area for a little while on business are likely to hit.

 

So that leaves you with moderately experienced cachers that are out for a single hunt in their own area. AND couple that with any potentially long drive-time, and finding a multi-stage can be less interesting than going in and finding a quick single find.

 

All that being said, I prefer a good multi-stage cache. It shows more thought on the part of the owner and can lead to a great experience.

 

The question is CF, do the people that find Thicken enjoy it? If the answer is yes, then it's a worthy cache.

 

Markwell

My Geocaching Page

[BassoonPilot]

I like challenging hikes, and I also like multi-caches ... but I like the multi-caches to be set up so that you end up back near where you started, not several miles away. Who wants or needs an additional 2 or 3 mile walk down a road back to the car after a long, difficult hike?

[+erik88l-r]

I agree with many who posted above me - give me a scenic hike of at least a half mile minimum, and preferably more, and a traditional well hidden cache at the end of it! Multi's are fine too, as long as it doesn't get tedious.

 

I won't bother with a 1/1 drive by cache unless I'm off on a business trip in another town or in the area for another cache anyway.

 

'Seldom bother with virtuals.

 

Locationless ones have no appeal to me. They must be terribly easy - I've never seen one logged with "Could not find it"

 

~erik~

[+erik88l-r]

I agree with many who posted above me - give me a scenic hike of at least a half mile minimum, and preferably more, and a traditional well hidden cache at the end of it! Multi's are fine too, as long as it doesn't get tedious.

 

I won't bother with a 1/1 drive by cache unless I'm off on a business trip in another town or in the area for another cache anyway.

 

'Seldom bother with virtuals.

 

Locationless ones have no appeal to me. They must be terribly easy - I've never seen one logged with "Could not find it"

 

~erik~

[+Clan Ferguson]

For those in the know, TOJ does not require the driving and does not contain the mind-benders that Hard as PI does. Yet Hard as PI is had about the same Finds/Month since placement. This was one of the things that prompted me to post this poll.

 

quote:

---

The question is CF, do the people that find Thicken enjoy it? If the answer is yes, then it's a worthy cache.

---

 

from the logs I belive those who have found did enjoy it. So thanks for the confidence booster Markwell. (hope you make out to TOJ)

 

p.s. My first Travel Bug is starting from here. this would be my other reason.

 

Cache On!!

 

James

"Big Dog"

-Clan Ferguson

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

I have a driveby cache I Hate I-5 with 43 hits. I have a well hidden cache The View with 2 hits. Sooo, guess which caches seem to be the most popular?? If you put out a cache that requires some work, it won't get much action.

 

I have no regrets putting out both types. It's fun to get those e-mails saying someone found your cache. When it is one of my more difficult caches that gets found it feels even better.

 

Never Squat With Yer Spurs On

[+orange]

I like a cache with a hike which has a scenic view or an enjoyable walk thru the woods.

 

Multi sound fun but I never know for sure how far I am going for. It would be a downer to abandon one after doing a stage or two. My only multi was really done as a two stage single cache and was set-up that way too. (Copper Mine One and Copper Mine Two).

[+CharlieP]

My favorite caches are ones which involve at least a moderate hike in a nice or unusual setting, and something of interest near the cache or along the way. Here in north Georgia, just a few caches that fit this description are: "Rocktown", "Brushy Mountain", "Raven Cliffs" and "Portland Caves". I also like caches that have a puzzle or creative twist to them, like: "Latitude and Longitude", "Buckhead", "EZ2C" and "Duncan's Folly". Multi's are fun, but I prefer the ones that you can hike or bike all the way, like "Heritage Park" and "Safecrack 1" as opposed to the driving multi.

 

The most frustrating (for me) are the caches that are *very well hidden* and either the coords are off, or the location is such that an accurate position is virtually impossible. This turns geocaching into a non-technical wide-area easter egg hunt, which does not appeal to me. But then, everyone is different.

 

FWIW,

CharlieP

[+ClayJar]

1. Drive at least two hours.

2. Canoe/kayak a moderate distance.

3. Lock canoe in guarded location.

4. Hike 5-10 miles over a mountain.

5. Arrive on the other side of the mountain.

6. Walk up to the blaze orange cache.

7. Open the cooler lid, trade, and log.

8. Walk back, paddle back, and drive home.

Okay, so now, does anybody want to make that cache for me? I'll spot you 1000 round-trip driving miles for the location, but I can be talked into driving farther if necessary.

[+ClayJar]

1. Drive at least two hours.

2. Canoe/kayak a moderate distance.

3. Lock canoe in guarded location.

4. Hike 5-10 miles over a mountain.

5. Arrive on the other side of the mountain.

6. Walk up to the blaze orange cache.

7. Open the cooler lid, trade, and log.

8. Walk back, paddle back, and drive home.

Okay, so now, does anybody want to make that cache for me? I'll spot you 1000 round-trip driving miles for the location, but I can be talked into driving farther if necessary.

[+GatoRx]

I really enjoy a well-planned multi-stager, but there just isn't a large number of them in my area, so I've mainly done single-stagers. When its nice outside, and I've got a whole day to devote to caching, I'd much rather hike around in the woods on a multi than drive around looking for short single caches.

[+Web-ling]

...if I'm alone or taking my kids. If I'm with the kids, I like short single-step caches with lots of toys. When I actually get to cache alone, I prefer either multis or more difficult traditional caches.

 

However, if it's a cache, I'll hunt it. I've hunted (and enjoyed) and placed just about every kind there is. Plus a few that don't fit neatly into ANY of the categories (like O-Caches).

 

[+El Diablo]

Don't tempt me to hard Clayjar. Below is the last special cache I set up. If your willing to play with the devil...it can be arranged.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=20201

 

El Diablo

[+El Diablo]

Don't tempt me to hard Clayjar. Below is the last special cache I set up. If your willing to play with the devil...it can be arranged.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=20201

 

El Diablo

[+Snowtrail]

I like single drive-bys to be micros. I think they last longer, and there's more of a chance that it will still be there when I go looking for it.

 

I like multi stage, but more than a micro. I want to be able to sit down and read logs, especially if I'm in the woods by myself with no chance of anyone coming up on me. I like going through what people have traded. I feel it's the same as reading the registers on the AT.

 

There are a few virtual caches that I will visit next week when I go on vacation. I don't mind them since I understand about the urban caches. It gets me to places that I wouldn't normally go, particularly if I'm from out of town. It's like an insider's guide to the town.

 

I haven't attempted any of the locationless caches. I think some are thought out well, and do make an attempt at making people work for the right to count it.

[GeoStars]

we enjoy moderate to long hikes. We've only hunted one multi but it was fun because it was in two different areas of the same park. I'm not sure we'd enjoy a multi if it involved a lot of driving but little hiking. There is a multi about an hour from us that involves hiking, puzzle-solving, etc. that we are looking forward to attempting. We're waiting for schedules and weather to improve.

 

I'm glad you posted this poll. I'm working on my first cache placement and had planned on making it a two-stage multi within the same park. I'm now thinking that I may make it a single. Food for thought...

 

GeoMedic - team leader of GeoStars

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ClayJar:

+ Drive _at least_ two hours.

+ Canoe/kayak a moderate distance.

+ Lock canoe in guarded location.

+ Hike 5-10 miles over a mountain.

+ Arrive on the other side of the mountain.

+ Walk up to the _blaze orange_ cache.

+ Open the cooler lid, trade, and log.

+ Walk back, paddle back, and drive home.

Okay, so now, does anybody want to make that cache for me? I'll spot you 1000 round-trip driving miles for the location, but I can be talked into driving farther if necessary.

---

 

Well, it doesn't quite fit your description, but Spooky Island Cache has yet to be claimed. You could always "secure" your canoe over on Riker's Island for 5 to 10 ...

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ClayJar:

+ Drive _at least_ two hours.

+ Canoe/kayak a moderate distance.

+ Lock canoe in guarded location.

+ Hike 5-10 miles over a mountain.

+ Arrive on the other side of the mountain.

+ Walk up to the _blaze orange_ cache.

+ Open the cooler lid, trade, and log.

+ Walk back, paddle back, and drive home.

Okay, so now, does anybody want to make that cache for me? I'll spot you 1000 round-trip driving miles for the location, but I can be talked into driving farther if necessary.

---

 

Well, it doesn't quite fit your description, but Spooky Island Cache has yet to be claimed. You could always "secure" your canoe over on Riker's Island for 5 to 10 ...

[+unclerojelio]

If it's on my 'radar' screen, I'll hunt it. If only to clear it off the screen. That being said, my favorites are multis where all the legs are within hiking distance and end up back where you started. Next best is a single with nice long hike with a scenic view. Park and grabs are okay. I don't like micros much. I get a kick out of trading useless stuff. Virtuals can be fun if there is some entertaining or interesting history involved. I've done a few locationless just for the giggle factor, or in the case that I can enter multiple logs for the same find

 

... Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--

I took the one less traveled by, ...

 

unclerojelio

[+unclerojelio]

If it's on my 'radar' screen, I'll hunt it. If only to clear it off the screen. That being said, my favorites are multis where all the legs are within hiking distance and end up back where you started. Next best is a single with nice long hike with a scenic view. Park and grabs are okay. I don't like micros much. I get a kick out of trading useless stuff. Virtuals can be fun if there is some entertaining or interesting history involved. I've done a few locationless just for the giggle factor, or in the case that I can enter multiple logs for the same find

 

... Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--

I took the one less traveled by, ...

 

unclerojelio

[+The GeoGadgets Team]

I agree with unclerojelio...

 

A cache? My favorite!

 

Any cache is 'good', but I do sigh with frustration when I see that the number of caches within 100 miles shows a number or two up, only to discover that the new ones are virtuals.

 

I don't hate virtuals... okay, yes they bug me, if only because the people who place them out here seem to do it in 'serial' fashion. I could place virtuals all day if I only wanted to get my placed count up, but I like to make the caches I place worth driving the distance for.

 

If I find a historical marker that would make a good virtual, I will make a traditional out of it by using the marker as a waypoint for an offset. I love using local history in my caches, and anyone who has done one of mine can tell I put some work into them. The majority of virts are just stopping points along the way to another place.

 

Give me a decent traditional that isn't too tough for terrain (and I don't mean drive-bys), or a multi-stage that I have to use my brain to get to any of the legs for and I'm wearing the tip off of my walking stick to get to it.

----------

Lori aka: RedwoodRed

KF6VFI

"I don't get lost, I investigate alternative destinations."

GeoGadgets Team Website

Comics, Video Games and Movie Fansite

 

It's not whether or not you pick your nose that matters, but where you put the booger...

[+The GeoGadgets Team]

I agree with unclerojelio...

 

A cache? My favorite!

 

Any cache is 'good', but I do sigh with frustration when I see that the number of caches within 100 miles shows a number or two up, only to discover that the new ones are virtuals.

 

I don't hate virtuals... okay, yes they bug me, if only because the people who place them out here seem to do it in 'serial' fashion. I could place virtuals all day if I only wanted to get my placed count up, but I like to make the caches I place worth driving the distance for.

 

If I find a historical marker that would make a good virtual, I will make a traditional out of it by using the marker as a waypoint for an offset. I love using local history in my caches, and anyone who has done one of mine can tell I put some work into them. The majority of virts are just stopping points along the way to another place.

 

Give me a decent traditional that isn't too tough for terrain (and I don't mean drive-bys), or a multi-stage that I have to use my brain to get to any of the legs for and I'm wearing the tip off of my walking stick to get to it.

----------

Lori aka: RedwoodRed

KF6VFI

"I don't get lost, I investigate alternative destinations."

GeoGadgets Team Website

Comics, Video Games and Movie Fansite

 

It's not whether or not you pick your nose that matters, but where you put the booger...

[+Leatherneck]

I like all types of caches with the exception of locationless caches. However, I do tend to like multi-stage caches best. The reason, I think, is there is more than one hunt involved. More bang for the buck so to speak.

[+KD7MXI]

traditionals walk right up to

 

welcome to MY world!!!

------------------------------------------------------------

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CacheAcrossAmerica

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

http://www.cachunuts.com

[+KD7MXI]

traditionals walk right up to

 

welcome to MY world!!!

------------------------------------------------------------

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CacheAcrossAmerica

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

http://www.cachunuts.com

[+bigeddy]

I like caches of many types so long as they offer a fun, fulfilling search. It's probably easier to describe what I don't like:

1. Obscure or nonexistent clues, especially when the cache is well hidden or the GPS reception is poor.

2. Highly inaccurate ratings.

3. Dangerous or unpleasant hiding places, such as among poison oak or on steep, off-trail slopes.

4. Poorly maintained caches.

About 1 out of 3 caches I've gone after has had at least 1 of these deficiencies; several have had 3 which makes me think that the owner didn't put much effort into it.