Micros Vs Traditionals

[+bigredmed]

Are there crappy, lame micros? Are their crappy, lame traditionals?

 

Yes, of course there are!

 

The point is not the size of the container, but the condition of crappiness.

 

We can do better.

 

We can collect really good caches from our collective experiences. Really tricky micros, and really unusual containers that bring micros to a new level of fun. Cool containers and hides that bring traditionals to a higher level.

 

We can list these caches in some sort of logical structure and use this as a means of teaching new players and re-learning ourselves what makes for a great cache.

 

When we see 40 hide-a-keys hidden in bushes along the road on private property where permission wasn't granted. When we see coordinates to garbage dumps instead of seashores because some knucklehead thought he was being tricky by hiding the cache in the garbage, we get burned out. Little, by little, inch by inch. We stop getting excited about the sport.

 

We can do better by collecting really great caches and telling people that these are some of the best in their categories and should be emulated. If a cacher was thinking about hiding a micro and had only "hide-a-keys'" as background, they will probably make a hide a key. If they see a cache like "Two bee or not to bee" or "pine cob" caches, they see what could be. Maybe they go to the hardware store and walk past the hide a keys. Maybe they don't just toss an ammo can into the brush.

 

And Brothers and Sisters, When that day comes, yes when that glorious day comes, we will all say "Hallelujah! Cache Quality has risen!"

 

Who is with me? lets list our two or three favorite micros, trads, and multis. Tell us what makes them memorable and why they should be used as a paradigm for quality.

[+JoGPS]

You said it brother

 

Can we get an amen here ………….. jOE

[+Jamie Z]

You said it brother

irony

[+norbu]

I like the micro - Frogs On Guard, cool location and nifty retrieval.

 

another micro - "END OF THE LINE...." is a great hide, both in the container, and the exposure. Neato keen.

 

a recent new cache (my husband did it) Fish Outta Water! is the newest from our local camo fiend. he is devious, any of his caches are good for inspiration.

 

multis - well, only one that I have done stands out....and well, I am NOT a groupie!

Lassie, get help!

 

[+Cherokeecacher]

Ford is better than Chevy

 

You said it brother

 

Can we get an amen here ………….. jOE

 

Ok....Ok....for real this time....

AMEN

[+bigredmed]

Thanks norbu.

 

For real, lets list the caches that stand out as really good examples of their genre and why.

 

I will put together a list that we can pin so people can use it for generating ideas of their own.

[BassoonPilot]

Isn't the "sameness" of caches one of the factors that increases their "lameness?"

[+Team Perks]

AMEN!! Lame caches are lame caches, regardless. It doesn't take much sometimes...a little thought and ingenuity can make even the most boring cache in the most boring area a lot more fun. (Trust me, I live in an area like that.)

[+bigredmed]

Isn't the "sameness" of caches one of the factors that increases their "lameness?"

The point isn't to create carbon copies of some novel (now) cache, but rather to collect cool caches that are particularly good examples of their genre so when one is thinking about setting up a cache, one can look over the examples in this listing and think of ways to incorporate their ideas and what they find in the list into an even better cache (hopefully.)

[+briansnat]

All of the really good micros that I've found:

 

Wheretogo? Vertigo!

 

Steam Power

 

Ramapo Mtn Micro Challenge

 

Really good regular sized caches:

 

Going through my find list I saw close to 100 that were excellent. I could be here all morning typing them all in, so I'll just pick out 3 to balance the micros:

 

The Funnel

 

Middle a Nowhere

 

The Giants Stairs.

 

And here's one EXCELLENT virtual

Air Crash 3

Edited September 21, 2004 by briansnat

[+wimseyguy]

Isn't the "sameness" of caches one of the factors that increases their "lameness?"

If the same technique is repeated over and over locally than perhaps it's quality does get lowered a bit. Unique doesn't automatically equal good either. Perhaps inspired by this thread someone will repeat a cache in their home turf that was outstanding in another location far away. I have had numerous requests from the creative cache container thread for one of my hiding/camo techniques. I doubt anyone is calling them lame in CA, MN, TX, PA or anywhere else where my clones have spawned.

 

Here is a Light Pole hide that most definitly doesn't suck, and has been replicated locally. Those of us who were on the road trip in April knew what to expect, but the rest of our local friends have been greatly perpexed. retreival is the challange here.

Here is a Guard rail hide that doesn't suck too. Finding and retreiving this one is tough.

This high exposure urban micro is in a suprisingly target rich environment.

This one of mine is a replica of one I saw elsewhere and is a good example of urban camo. It has fooled lots of hunters.

And finally this other one of mine is just another magkey holder. But it too is hard to retreive at times, and in a target rich location.

Edited September 21, 2004 by wimseyguy

[+Mr.Benchmark]

Isn't the "sameness" of caches one of the factors that increases their "lameness?"

If the same technique is repeated over and over locally than perhaps it's quality does get lowered a bit. Unique doesn't automatically equal good either.

Anything that's over-used can lower the quality a lot. I've been places where virtually all of the caches I found were LPCs. If substantially all of the caches within a small area are identical, hunting for them can get pretty tedious. (At least that's how it is for me.)

 

I think there are several factors that make for great caches: (or lack thereof makes for lameness)

 

Location. In many ways, this is a game about location. A great location makes a lot of difference to a lot of people. A great location might be kind of scenic, have some interesting history, or have some novel feature or hiding spot. Or perhaps it's the opposite of this and is kind of rugged and forbidding. Some people will enjoy such a challenge. Maybe there's interesting terrain to deal with, or other challenges inherent in the location itself. There's nothing wrong highly public caches either - some of those places, if carefully chosen, can be challenging and fun to retrieve. Many people enjoy a short walk to the cache, although some don't.

 

Creativity. Maybe it's a clever container, or a clever hiding technique. Maybe it's an interesting cache theme, carried over into the location and the container or it's contents. Maybe there's a bit of humor involved. Not every cache has to be a creative masterpiece - it's possible to make something nice using only the basics, and present it in an appealing way.

 

Challenge. Having a variety of different types and difficulties of challenges is a good thing. There's all kinds of challenges - puzzles, clever hiding tricks, terrain based challenges. Some can be difficult, some easy. As long as there's variety, everyone should be happy.

[+BlueDeuce]

A great location makes a lot of difference to a lot of people.

A great location kind of takes care of the problem for you. You can place an ammo can under a log and people will thank you for bringing them there.

 

It's those not so great spots that really present the challenge. You have to provide something more than just being there.

 

It's not always easy to come up with something original in the area. When you have cachers who search in 50 miles in each direction, you really don't want to have the third fench post cache, or the forth birdhouse cache. And people are listing great micros and such but since there are no examples to emulate I'm not getting any new ideas from them.

 

I try and find out what caches are in other areas that aren't in mine, but they aren't easy to discover unless you go there.

[+norbu]

so does anyone have any more great caches in San Diego??? I haven't done that many of them yet...

[+Mr.Benchmark]

It's not always easy to come up with something original in the area. When you have cachers who search in 50 miles in each direction, you really don't want to have the third fench post cache, or the forth birdhouse cache. And people are listing great micros and such but since there are no examples to emulate I'm not getting any new ideas from them.

I forget about low cache density areas. When I mentioned finding a bunch of LPC's, I was talking more than 10 within a 1.5-2 mile radius, not 50 miles!

 

The poor LPC gets picked on because it can be overused in some places. One LPC I did was really, terrific, though. It had a puzzle with a theme. (The theme was ultimately about insanity.) Once you solved it, the lamp post was on the grounds of a former insane asylum. This was a really fun cache, at least for me. It managed to provide a small adventure - which given that you were ultimately seeking a lamp in a highly urban area was a pretty neat trick.

 

Another micro I did involved a detective story type setting. You were given a clue (this was the puzzle.) You solved the puzzle by interpreting the clue, and then you had to hunt for the micro. (Which was a spy's dead-drop.) The twist was that the coordinates were only approximate - you had to look for a specific graffitti to find the micro. This ended up being a hide-a-key, stuck to a fence post, in a generic park. This isn't bad at all - but the fact that you had to "solve the case" and then hunt around for the right spot to search without your GPS really added a lot to the experience. It was fun, at least for me. (I hunted it at night, which might have added to the experience a bit.)

 

So I mention these because neither of them was cool primarily because of the location, but mostly because of the cache theme. Creativity goes a long way!

[+BlueDeuce]

So I mention these because neither of them was cool primarily because of the location, but mostly because of the cache theme. Creativity goes a long way!

Ok, I get cha’ now,

 

I have been looking through some Encyclopedia Brown stories to see if there might be any similar ‘clue techniques’ to incorporate in a cache search. Nothing yet to add to bigredmed’s listing request.

[Parsa]

I live in San Diego County. Now it's not that we don't have some lame caches, we do, but on the whole most of the geocachers try to hide very creative or scenic caches. We have some fantastic puzzle and adventure caches around here. The trick is to learn from mistakes and to learn from others. One area I went to had a more experienced cacher hiding mint tins under lamp posts and mail boxes. Well, guess what? All the new cachers in the area did exactly the same thing. In certain counties to the north (which shall remain nameless ), many of the caches had poor log books (sticky note pads, and 3x5 cards). Why? The cachers probably learned by example. Quality caches encourage quality. Creativity breeds more of the same.

 

Here's a scientific law for geocaching:

The more time spent thinking, planning, and working on a cache = the better the quality of the cache

 

I personally think caches can be just an ammo box under a bush. It's all OK. However, think about where you are placing the cache. Why exactly are you putting it there?

Can a cache be placed in an urban, industrial area? Sure, but use creativity or history to make it more interesting. Take people back to what the area was like 100 years ago, or make a real mind-bender of a camouflage.

 

One last word. Try to think about families and kids once in a while when planning caches. The little kids really don't get much from little micro caches. It's the big box stuffed with goodies that will get them to go out with mom or dad. Plant some micros, but balance it with a family cache or two. It's hard to get larger caches into urban areas, but creativity and camouflage can go a long way.

 

Parsa

Edited September 21, 2004 by Parsa

[+Spencersb]

Okay, let me put on my Nomex drawz here...

 

Ahem...what some might call a "lame" cache has a place in geocaching.

 

Now, let me explain. When I first started this, about 4 months ago, I hunted every cache within 10 miles of me, mostly because I didn't really understand the difficulty/terrain ratings. The first cache I did was a virtual, the 5th (same weekend) was a 4/3 in the middle of a thickit! Over time, I have figured out which ones I like and which ones I don't. I'm pickier than I was at first (except with FTFs ) BUT, I have used 1/1s to introduce my 9 year old (and 4 foot tall) daughter to geocaching, and she loves it! She doesn't KNOW the caches are lame, she doesn't CARE that the caches are lame, she just loves to find something! She can't navigate 3 miles of waist-deep (shoulder deep to her) blackberry vines, no matter how cool the camo on the ammo can is! And she's only nine, she's not that hard to trick! It's a LOT more fun for her when SHE finds it, than when dad points it out to her!

 

My hides are better now than my first one, too. I'm developing trickier camo, finding more interesting places, or themes, or whatever. But I may hide a 1 terrain (higher difficulty) micro near my work because of the dearth of caches in the immediate area, and I'm sure there are others around here like me who get busy and don't have time to cache, so they need a lunchtime FIX!

 

Geocaching (and geocachers) should be big enough to have something for everyone. If everything was hard, newbies would quickly get frustrated and quit. There's something to be said for easier (or at least, more accessible) caches for youngsters, newbies, and handicapped cachers. All of these folks deserve to have fun, too! Without newbies, we'll all find each others caches and run out of ways to trick each other, and even WE would stop having fun!

 

My $.02, drop the change in the next film canister you find!

Edited September 21, 2004 by Spencersb

[Parsa]

Easy does not equal lame.

 

Easy caches can be great. Especially if your brain hurts after solving that projectile motion problem you did for the last cache.

 

Easy caches can be creative and scenic.

 

Philosophically, however, I guess you could argue that truely lame caches have a purpose in that they let us know a great cache when we see one.

 

Parsa

[+Mr.Benchmark]

Now, let me explain. When I first started this, about 4 months ago, I hunted every cache within 10 miles of me, mostly because I didn't really understand the difficulty/terrain ratings.

The problem isn't easy caches. Easy caches are great sometimes. Nice for beginners, and for those who want to increase their find counts rapidly. Hey, they are great for nightcaching, too - I do that a lot and you can break your neck at night on some of the more difficult terrain caches.

 

No, the problem is the overabundance of extremely easy, poorly conceived caches in some areas. If 140 of the 150 caches nearest you had been trivial finds taking you on a tour of every Wal-Mart and Costco parking lot, as well as many of the scenic guard rails in the area, with less than a 50' walk from the car to each cache, would you have stuck with this game? There's a place for even caches like these - but when they are the majority, I think that's a problem.

 

I agree with you about the need for the diversity of types of hides. I'm certainly not one to advocate banning easy caches - this was tried with virtuals, and look where we are today - dealing with almost the exact same problem, but on a much, much larger scale.

 

In my opinion, the basic problem is that the system rewards you for doing the largest number of minimal effort caches, both for the hider and the finder. Not everyone plays it this way, but human nature is what it is, and the current system encourages these tendencies.

[+norbu]

A really easy cache that I really enjoyed (trying to stay on topic, he asked for examples ) was Prince Charming's Ride

Oh, and it is a micro too

Easy can be a lot of fun. I would like to try going out on a night hunt for some easier caches. that would be more fun than my only other nighttime experience.

[+Spencersb]

In my opinion, the basic problem is that the system rewards you for doing the largest number of minimal effort caches, both for the hider and the finder. Not everyone plays it this way, but human nature is what it is, and the current system encourages these tendencies.

Na argument on the saturation issue, I guess I just don't see that here, or in Seattle, the only two areas I have cached to speak of.

 

As for the current system...what rewards? A big find count or a big hide count? So someone has big numbers, maybe even BOGUS numbers, so what? It's not like we give out awards or bonuses. If I see a prolific hider who hides cookie-cutter caches (been there, done that ), I just decline to hunt his caches. And what other "system" could we have? Could certain finds (or hides) "count" more than others? The only real problems I see are the possibility of giving geocaching a bad name amongst non-cachers, or taking up a 528 foot radius where a good cache could be placed by someone else. Like I said, I don't really see much of that here, maybe y'all do, and if I did, maybe it would bother me, too!

 

Edited for crappy typing skills

Edited September 21, 2004 by Spencersb

[+Mr.Benchmark]

As for the current system...what rewards? A big find count or a big hide count?

I think some people want the find count to mean more than it does. I think this is human nature. People are competitive and enjoy increasing their find count. I'm cetainly not in competition with anyone else, but I do enjoy seeing my count slowly increase, even if it's only to reach personal milestones. This isn't the main reason I cache - not at all! It's not completely meaningless to me though. I've tried to say "The numbers don't matter to me at all", the official party line - but I can't say that honestly. They do matter to me, at least a little bit. And I do think that find counts matter to lots of people a lot more than they might care to admit. The numbers don't lie, people seek these caches in great numbers. Why else would they do this if not for the numbers? If you want to create a cache few will find, make a 1.5/2 (ammocan under a pile of sticks) at the end of a 3 mile hike to someplace nice. In some places, you can find 10-20 caches in the time it takes to do the one hiking cache I mentioned.

 

For the hider, I think a primary motivating factor is getting more "I found it, your cache is the greatest" logs. More caches = more of these logs. Maybe in your area people will log a weak cache with:

"I thought this was pretty similar to the other 25 hides you've done, so I didn't much care for it - boring!"

But that doesn't happen here! Mostly the feedback is positive, and I think this can be powerful reinforcement to some people to continue to hide lots of caches, good or bad.

Around here, about the only time you'll see a really harsh log is if the cache has SERIOUS problems - significantly misrated, wrong TYPE of cache, dangerous location, just something totally screwed up. And even then, people are usually quite polite. So you see, there's very little negative feedback. So hiding lots of caches maximizes the positive feedback.

 

Again, not everyone is motivated this way. But human nature tends towards finding the biggest gain for the least effort.

 

And what other "system" could we have? Could certain finds (or hides) "count" more than others?

 

Yes. I think a correctly balanced scoring system could be used to subtly influence the way people play the game, to help insure balance, diversity of types of hides, and help maintain the fun in the game for everyone. Certainly it would be nice to be able to subtly influence things, rather than creating rules like "there will be very few virtual caches from now on", or "micros are banned." However, there's little point in discussing it - I believe the probability of this ever happening here is at or near zero.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

As they say in the realestate biz: location, location, location.

[+drat19]

No, the problem is the overabundance of extremely easy, poorly conceived caches in some areas. If 140 of the 150 caches nearest you had been trivial finds taking you on a tour of every Wal-Mart and Costco parking lot, as well as many of the scenic guard rails in the area, with less than a 50' walk from the car to each cache, would you have stuck with this game? There's a place for even caches like these - but when they are the majority, I think that's a problem.

Thank you, Mr. Benchmark. Well said.

 

My take:

 

Dave's Note to Local Hiders

 

-Dave R. in Biloxi

[vagabond]

so does anyone have any more great caches in San Diego??? I haven't done that many of them yet...

How about the caches in PQ canyon you could spend the better part of the day there. Or any of Tuna's caches that are still active

[+fresgo]

The topic is lame! Isn't a micro considered a "traditional' cache? At least that's what it says on the cache print friendly page. What is lame? maybe I am lame for replying to this thread. Who really cares so there are lame caches. Yes there are lame micros - but aren't there lame regular size caches and there are lame virtuals just as there are lame big size caches, there are lame locationless caches. Just like there are lame people, lame cars, lame sports, lame products in stores. Are there any lame subscriber caches? If you don't like what you are finding then get out of the hobby/sport/activity whatever it is we are calling it now. At the very least get out of the discussion group and go and hide the world's perfect cache one that you think others want to find. STOP OBSESSING! BTW if you look for any of mine be careful cause most of my hides are micros and they are extremely LAME!

 

Especially this one The "Micro" Cache

 

 

And this one

 

I Hate Micros

 

And this one

 

Not Another Altoids Container!

 

And this one

 

Hedwig's Home

 

And this one, even though it's archived It was really really lame!

 

Like, Omigod! It’s Another Micro!

 

And finally this one

 

Flatter Than a Pancake

[+bigredmed]

Let's try to keep this thread on topic.

[+fresgo]

the topic "micros vs. traditionals" is kinda redundant because micros are traditional caches.