Judging from last time, many of the activities involve the option to hide a cache. There should definitely be extra points for GCA hides, which would solve the problem for those who live in locations without many GCA caches.Team Wibble wrote:I'm not so sure about different weighting for GC/GCA caches, only because that may disadvantage cachers in areas where there a fewer GCA caches and give an unfair advantage to those in areas flush with GCAs. But then, that might be a personal bias because I'm one of those who lives in an area with not many GCAs
Geosportz
Re: Geosportz
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: 01 January 10 10:23 pm
- Location: Jan Juc
- Contact:
Re: Geosportz
Sounds like a fun exercise, hope I will have time to participate !pwags wrote: Judging from last time, many of the activities involve the option to hide a cache. There should definitely be extra points for GCA hides, which would solve the problem for those who live in locations without many GCA caches.
On the hiding, I wonder if there should be a requirement that they be "genuine" hides, as in caches intended for a long and happy life, rather than just a chinese food container under a bush near a tennis court which is only intended to last a week or two. I don't really know how you'd enforce it and 99% of people would do the right thing.
Maybe that means you don't worry about it, but it's worth mentioning
Re: Geosportz
Bonus points based on the ratings, recommendations, or "favourites"?juc_cacher wrote:Sounds like a fun exercise, hope I will have time to participate !pwags wrote: Judging from last time, many of the activities involve the option to hide a cache. There should definitely be extra points for GCA hides, which would solve the problem for those who live in locations without many GCA caches.
On the hiding, I wonder if there should be a requirement that they be "genuine" hides, as in caches intended for a long and happy life, rather than just a chinese food container under a bush near a tennis court which is only intended to last a week or two. I don't really know how you'd enforce it and 99% of people would do the right thing.
Maybe that means you don't worry about it, but it's worth mentioning
- caughtatwork
- Posts: 17017
- Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Geosportz
Last time the hides has to be a size large. But there are always people who do it for the numbers, not for the spirit.
Re: Geosportz
So the finds have to be new ones, you can't go find one that you've found? I suppose it's not a find then is it you're just visiting something that you've found. Answered own question
- caughtatwork
- Posts: 17017
- Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Geosportz
Correct. You can only find finds that you haven't found before.s_mc500 wrote:So the finds have to be new ones, you can't go find one that you've found? I suppose it's not a find then is it you're just visiting something that you've found. Answered own question
Re: Geosportz
I reckon you could make the requirement to "find" either GC or GCA but if you "hide" it has to be a GCA only.
No point differentiation between finding a GC or GCA cache though as it's not fair on people who don't have many nearby.
No point differentiation between finding a GC or GCA cache though as it's not fair on people who don't have many nearby.
- tronador
- 6500 or more caches found
- Posts: 1555
- Joined: 04 November 05 10:18 pm
- Location: Lidcombe,Sydney, NSW
Re: Geosportz
No play it like last time, no point difference for GC or GCA. I like the challenge of trying to get as many points as possible by doing the high terrain caches or high difficutly caches.
This led to great strategy play by all the players and doing caches far outside their area just to get the combined totals as high as possible. I know I spent many weekends well out of Sydney.
AND I like the competitiveness of this game. It's nice to have limited prizes like last time, it gets you to strive to place in the top 5 if you want one. I made top 20 last time but was half way through the game when I realised my strategy was all wrong.
I must admit I prefer this game to the moveable cache race because I am in control and not reliant on others moving a game piece.
This led to great strategy play by all the players and doing caches far outside their area just to get the combined totals as high as possible. I know I spent many weekends well out of Sydney.
AND I like the competitiveness of this game. It's nice to have limited prizes like last time, it gets you to strive to place in the top 5 if you want one. I made top 20 last time but was half way through the game when I realised my strategy was all wrong.
I must admit I prefer this game to the moveable cache race because I am in control and not reliant on others moving a game piece.
Re: Geosportz
I say this sounds like fun.
- Marcus Vitruvius
- 5000 or more caches found
- Posts: 297
- Joined: 23 July 07 12:35 pm
- Location: Newcastle, NSW
Re: Geosportz
tronador wrote:No play it like last time, no point difference for GC or GCA. I like the challenge of trying to get as many points as possible by doing the high terrain caches or high difficutly caches.
This led to great strategy play by all the players and doing caches far outside their area just to get the combined totals as high as possible. I know I spent many weekends well out of Sydney.
AND I like the competitiveness of this game. It's nice to have limited prizes like last time, it gets you to strive to place in the top 5 if you want one. I made top 20 last time but was half way through the game when I realised my strategy was all wrong.
I must admit I prefer this game to the moveable cache race because I am in control and not reliant on others moving a game piece.
Agree...All caches should be treated the same regardless of GC or GCA, for the reasons already stated, and not all cachers do both kinds of caches, so effectively some cachers are already restricted by what they can find. Just keep it open slather for anyone to participate.
Also, I think there has to be room for people to strive and win the competition based on what they do throughout the course of the competition...Last time, Team Wibble (kudos to them) pretty much had it won from day one simply because they found/placed the maximum point cache on that day, and due to the nature of counting back in the event of a draw, which was always going to happen, it meant the competition side of things was over. I think it's more interesting and fun to watch a game unfold and change during the course of the competition so you're never quite sure what may happen or who may come out on top, much like the other previous games. This also benefits those who start late...get injured or sick etc.
Also, as Tronador mentioned above, what these games promote is getting out and finding caches potentially outside your scope of caching...much like the Well Rounded Caching game...which I think is fantastic. I might also take this moment to say how much I enjoy these types of games, and thank c@w for his efforts in providing them.
Just a few thoughts.
- caughtatwork
- Posts: 17017
- Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Geosportz
OK, I get the message. Have to look at keeping stuff secret so no-one gets an advantage.
You're all going to hate the marathon
You're all going to hate the marathon
- Team Wibble
- 2100 or more geocaches found
- Posts: 1054
- Joined: 18 October 04 11:47 am
- Location: Adelaide
Re: Geosportz
Yep, agree here. As much as we liked winning, we did secure at least the guarantee of winning (if we ultimately got to the score of 888) by realising immediately that maximum points for a single cache needed to be scored ASAP, and quickly constructing, finding a hiding spot and placing a 5/5 large puzzle cache within about a day of the competition starting (lucky we had that giant ammo can on hand!).Marcus Vitruvius wrote: Also, I think there has to be room for people to strive and win the competition based on what they do throughout the course of the competition...Last time, Team Wibble (kudos to them) pretty much had it won from day one simply because they found/placed the maximum point cache on that day, and due to the nature of counting back in the event of a draw, which was always going to happen, it meant the competition side of things was over. I think it's more interesting and fun to watch a game unfold and change during the course of the competition so you're never quite sure what may happen or who may come out on top, much like the other previous games. This also benefits those who start late...get injured or sick etc.
The aim to get a certain score was a good idea, but it ultimately came down to that countback. A progressive scoring system would be much more fun!
- caughtatwork
- Posts: 17017
- Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Geosportz
The target of 888 was also a contributing factor as anyone who ended up with 888 would have been in a count back. I doubt we will do that this time, as you identified, 1st in best dressed.
A challenge then comes in with highest points going to those most active who can tackle a 5/5 while fatties like me get to a 3/3 if they're lucky.
I need to think about this to try and level the field a little. Not quite sure how to do this. My recollection is we struggled the level the field the last time (which is why we ended up with a target of 888 for all 30 events). i.e. It didn't matter if you found a 5/5 as you couldn't exceed the 888 points, so you had to strategise rather than just highest number wins.
If you have some thoughts it would be appreciated.
A challenge then comes in with highest points going to those most active who can tackle a 5/5 while fatties like me get to a 3/3 if they're lucky.
I need to think about this to try and level the field a little. Not quite sure how to do this. My recollection is we struggled the level the field the last time (which is why we ended up with a target of 888 for all 30 events). i.e. It didn't matter if you found a 5/5 as you couldn't exceed the 888 points, so you had to strategise rather than just highest number wins.
If you have some thoughts it would be appreciated.
- Marcus Vitruvius
- 5000 or more caches found
- Posts: 297
- Joined: 23 July 07 12:35 pm
- Location: Newcastle, NSW
Re: Geosportz
So what about still having a maximum target, but in the event of a tie, the team with the highest average per cache find would get the nod. In this sense, the strategy would be trying to maximise your points per cache, but obviously not go over the set target. It would mean trying to plot out all the available points for caches and work out which ones to target for the highest possible average.
Keep in mind, I assume these caches would also have to fit the description for each nominated event like last time. May prove tricky.
Keep in mind, I assume these caches would also have to fit the description for each nominated event like last time. May prove tricky.
- Richary
- 8000 or more caches found
- Posts: 4189
- Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
- Location: Waitara, Sydney
Re: Geosportz
Good on Team Wibble for picking the right strategy last time. I made the 888 points, but was stuck in that there were no caches within reach that could give me the maximum points on a countback.
We could partly eliminate that strategy by making the countback only work on finds not hides, but then it still comes down to whoever can get out on the first weekend and do a 5/5 mystery with a large container that fits the category. Which probably means South Australia wins again
The first in best dressed would make it more of a race than a competition, so some hardcore competitors will just take the first week off and get the required points. Which then removes the incentive for others to keep going. I prefer the longer timeframe as while I enjoy caching I'm not that competitive that it is the be all and end all of my month.
I quite like Marcus's idea of the highest average, it means you try and get the points with the minimum number of caches logged. Though in reality it is still likely to lead to a tie. Of course once someone has got there in 10 caches and you realise you still have to get 14 to reach the target the incentive to continue is then removed. Of course also on the downside is some competitors will be lucky and have some high value matching caches nearby they haven't found, while others will be scratching around looking for high value ones rather than just getting more finds to get the same numbers.
Maybe an award for the most number of "events" completed to get to the target number, encourages people to find more caches. How close can I get to the 30 events and not go over, but still get there?
We could partly eliminate that strategy by making the countback only work on finds not hides, but then it still comes down to whoever can get out on the first weekend and do a 5/5 mystery with a large container that fits the category. Which probably means South Australia wins again
The first in best dressed would make it more of a race than a competition, so some hardcore competitors will just take the first week off and get the required points. Which then removes the incentive for others to keep going. I prefer the longer timeframe as while I enjoy caching I'm not that competitive that it is the be all and end all of my month.
I quite like Marcus's idea of the highest average, it means you try and get the points with the minimum number of caches logged. Though in reality it is still likely to lead to a tie. Of course once someone has got there in 10 caches and you realise you still have to get 14 to reach the target the incentive to continue is then removed. Of course also on the downside is some competitors will be lucky and have some high value matching caches nearby they haven't found, while others will be scratching around looking for high value ones rather than just getting more finds to get the same numbers.
Maybe an award for the most number of "events" completed to get to the target number, encourages people to find more caches. How close can I get to the 30 events and not go over, but still get there?