Poll: How many waypoints is too many in a multi?

For all your general chit chat, caching or not.

How many waypoints in a multi is too many?

Poll ended at 12 February 06 1:38 am

One (offset)
3
7%
Two
0
No votes
Three
3
7%
Four
6
14%
Five
18
41%
Six
4
9%
Seven
2
5%
Eight
2
5%
Nine
0
No votes
Ten
6
14%
 
Total votes: 44

Darth Fellatio
Posts: 14
Joined: 13 July 05 3:57 pm
Location: The Dark Side

Post by Darth Fellatio » 30 January 06 9:31 am

riblit wrote:With my cacher hat firmly in place, less is best if its a gc.com cache as you have to add them to that PITA of a waypoint form.<br />
Try it for a few waypoints and see.
...or you could just hide them on GCA.com

User avatar
Papa Bear_Left
800 or more hollow logs searched
800 or more hollow logs searched
Posts: 2573
Joined: 03 April 03 12:28 am
Location: Kalamunda, WA
Contact:

Post by Papa Bear_Left » 30 January 06 1:11 pm

riblit wrote:With my cacher hat firmly in place, less is best if its a gc.com cache as you have to add them to that PITA of a waypoint form.<br />
Try it for a few waypoints and see.
Just did, and it is!

The simple addition of an "add new waypoint" button would help (I got smart eventually and started using "open link in new page" from the main form)
And the unique prefix stuff is just silly.

However, the basic idea is great. At last the reviewers will have some way to tell when a cache ends too close to the end of another multi!

User avatar
riblit
It's the journey.
It's the journey.
Posts: 3444
Joined: 04 April 03 6:30 pm
Location: Land Grant of John Campbell

Post by riblit » 30 January 06 3:28 pm

Bear_Left wrote:
The simple addition of an "add new waypoint" button would help (I got smart eventually and started using "open link in new page" from the main form)
And the unique prefix stuff is just silly.

However, the basic idea is great. At last the reviewers will have some way to tell when a cache ends too close to the end of another multi!
The unique prefix is needed as the resulting 6 char code becomes the unique index in the database. At the moment its too open as anything except the groundspeak 'reserved' ones can be used.

Some sort of pseudo standard such as Px = parking Hx or Sx for hidden or secret waypoints, Wx for intermediate waypoints, where x is a digit would be good and makes them easy to filter out in GSAK.


It's a lot easier on the reviewers as the website code can check the distances. The old method entailed searching through the archived reviewer notes on the multi to find the coordinates. If the multi was listed before all the waypoints were required they won't be there.

Cachers also added the coordinates in ways that stopped a copy-paste into the distance tool working without editing the waypoints.


33 45 234
33 45-234
33,45,234
33.45.234
33-45-234

Were some of the more common examples that needed editing.

User avatar
Chwiliwr
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 900
Joined: 10 April 05 10:39 pm
Location: Leeming Western Australia

Post by Chwiliwr » 30 January 06 4:03 pm

riblit wrote:
Bear_Left wrote:
The simple addition of an "add new waypoint" button would help (I got smart eventually and started using "open link in new page" from the main form)
And the unique prefix stuff is just silly.

However, the basic idea is great. At last the reviewers will have some way to tell when a cache ends too close to the end of another multi!
The unique prefix is needed as the resulting 6 char code becomes the unique index in the database. At the moment its too open as anything except the groundspeak 'reserved' ones can be used.

Some sort of pseudo standard such as Px = parking Hx or Sx for hidden or secret waypoints, Wx for intermediate waypoints, where x is a digit would be good and makes them easy to filter out in GSAK.

groundspeak should never have made the prefix something that a user has to enter as, as already seen in the GC forums, it creates a lot of interpretation as to what the prefix should be. After looking after a rather large database where they tried to make codes meaninful and coming to grief because of that all future codes in that database were just sequential numbers with the description providing the meaning not the code itself.

If this was adopted by groundspeak then all you would be entering is the information actually required not having to make decisions about prefixes so the database can have an unique code. (Bad practice to force a database issue onto the user.) It would have made entry much simpler as the system would just give the next number in the sequence for each cache when a new waypoint was added. Each waypoint is still unique and, in my view, much more easier to handle within the database.

BTW I did suggest this in the GC discussion before they implemented this but Jeremy didn't seem to pick up on the problems that a meaninful prefix has now caused so the suggestion was ignored. I also pointed out that the code involved should have been simpler with not having to worry about checking for a prefix that was reserved as all of reserved ones are alpha and not numeric.

User avatar
SWAG agg
300 or more found
300 or more found
Posts: 22
Joined: 30 August 04 5:07 pm
Location: Sutherland Shire

Post by SWAG agg » 31 January 06 1:19 pm

The problem with creating multis is that many people won't have a go at them, even if they are very easy. I have met cachers who don't load any multis into their GPS's because they think they'll take too long or be too difficult. Some of the ones they miss out on have been fabulous but simple offset caches.Most multis don't take much more effort than traditionals.<br><br>
When you add a puzzle aspect to your cache, expect the finders to drop off even more dramatically. But that's another thread...

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 17015
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Post by caughtatwork » 31 January 06 2:04 pm

SWAG agg wrote:The problem with creating multis is that many people won't have a go at them, even if they are very easy. I have met cachers who don't load any multis into their GPS's because they think they'll take too long or be too difficult. Some of the ones they miss out on have been fabulous but simple offset caches.Most multis don't take much more effort than traditionals.<br><br>
When you add a puzzle aspect to your cache, expect the finders to drop off even more dramatically. But that's another thread...
I read the cache description and previous logs when coming across a multi in the hopes that it will give an indication of time and/or distance.

This is sometimes successful and sometimes not. I prefer to hunt multis when I am on my own as the kids are not really interested in driving, stopping, getting clues, driving, stopping, etc, etc. Also if they don't know how far they will have to go this is another disincentive.

I know the game is not designed for kids (which is why I do them on my own for the most part), but even I baulk at some of them given I have simply no idea whether I am dressed suitably, will need additional water (even on hot days in the suburbs), need to drive to 10 different location through the hellish city traffic, etc.

It would be nice if an indication of time or distance would be added, but I also understand that some multis and hiders are there to test the mettle of those who choose to do it.

I'm also quite wary of (some) cachers multis as previous logs indicate that there are problems and with waypoints. There are some that many people have tried and succeeded at, but only by guess work as the clues are just straight up, wrong. Consistent notes from every cacher who tries the cache indicating that there is a problem is a sure fire way for me to avoid the cache. Even more so when the hider doesn't indicate that there is either something or nothing wrong.

New multi's I also stay away from. There are just too many of them that get released and they have problems. I have better caches to find than travel an hour to find a typo in the clues.

I appreciate not everyone gets someone to beta test their cache and that's why I won't hunt them until they're fixed or have at least half a dozen finds on them and none of the logs indicate a problem with the waypoints.

There you go. My 2 cents worth on the subject.

Damo.
Posts: 2183
Joined: 04 April 04 5:01 pm
Location: Jannali

Post by Damo. » 31 January 06 9:44 pm

SWAG agg wrote:The problem with creating multis is that many people won't have a go at them, even if they are very easy. I have met cachers who don't load any multis into their GPS's because they think they'll take too long or be too difficult. Some of the ones they miss out on have been fabulous but simple offset caches.Most multis don't take much more effort than traditionals.
When you add a puzzle aspect to your cache, expect the finders to drop off even more dramatically. But that's another thread...
caughtatwork wrote: I read the cache description and previous logs when coming across a multi in the hopes that it will give an indication of time and/or distance.

I prefer to hunt multis when I am on my own as the kids are not really interested in driving, stopping, getting clues, driving, stopping, etc, etc. Also if they don't know how far they will have to go this is another disincentive.

It would be nice if an indication of time or distance would be added, but I also understand that some multis and hiders are there to test the mettle of those who choose to do it.
The Matrix Has You Cache is my only "proper" multi and despite being in the middle of Sydney CBD doesn't get a lot of hits. (This could in part be the muggle factor and people just not posting notes or DNFs however.)
It does appear that simply being listed as a multi does reduce by a large amount the number of finds.

I guess some people don't like any uncertainty or suprises. :? I could put in the exact distance, direction and time to walk it but I think that would detract from the experience.
Last edited by Damo. on 04 February 06 2:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mr Walker
150 or more caches found
150 or more caches found
Posts: 120
Joined: 16 September 04 1:49 pm
Location: Tumby Bay South Australia

Post by Mr Walker » 04 February 06 1:43 pm

Would like to respectfuly disagree with Rabbitto that placing singular caches is always the best option, even when the stages are not particularly linked. Sometimes the fun is in following the trail, and in not knowing your ultimate destination. As a kid in the 50's my dad would set up treasure hunts like this with clues along the way. When i came upon Geocaching this was one of the joys I rediscovered. Certainly most people don't seem to like or have the time for multi caches, but those who do enjoy them intensely. After a year of caching and the realisation that my two multi caches were very poorly sought after, compared with the twenty or so single caches I put out I nearly broke them up into single caches, then I got some very pleasant feedback from a couple of experienced cachers who said that these multis were the best they had done in the district. A lot of single caches in an area doesn't make it any easier to place new ones, as a fellow cacher from my home town found out. He tried to establish his first multi, only to find that at each time he did, one of the stages was too close to a single cache. When your home base is a small town about 1.5 k's long and 500 metres wide, it makes it hard to use local markers in more than one or two caches.

Rabbitto
4000 or more? I'm officially obsessed.
4000 or more? I'm officially obsessed.
Posts: 793
Joined: 01 April 04 2:01 pm
Location: Rowville, Victoria

Post by Rabbitto » 05 February 06 12:21 am

Although I know exactly the point you are trying to make and I'm glad that everyone enjoys the sport in their own way, you have confirmed a couple of the points that I made. For example as you have mentioned Tumby Bay has a limited number of cache worthy spots (most of which already have caches). If you got in early enough, with one comprehensive mystery multi, you could easily deprive the town of having more than one cache total. Secondly, you could put down a mystery tour multi cache that say, starts in Tumby Bay and ends in Port Niell. Just at face value it sounds fair enough. Consider someone though who is making a one way diversion on their way from Adelaide to Perth. They pick up the first waypoint and find they are headed a few dozen kilometres back down the road that they already came and probaly wont. If heading the other way then it's all cool. If your intention was to show off a few of the great spots on this trip, then why not make it into a series of six or so related caches. that can be enjoyed in any order by people travelling in either direction. If you're still set on creating the mystery tour, then there is still the option of creating six seperate caches, one traditional and five mystery, each one that contains the co-ordinates of the next cache in order. It could acheive the same thing but if nothing else, at least reward the finder with half a dozen finds too there name for their efforts. (Come to think of it, if you want to take that to an extreme, come and try Biggles Bear's new Diabolical series over here) To back you up though, every cache has it's joy and without some of those as you have described and placed, the sport would be a little poorer. Just to note that there are downsides and other options.

Team Red Devil
50 or more caches found
50 or more caches found
Posts: 437
Joined: 10 December 04 4:24 pm
Location: West Oz
Contact:

Post by Team Red Devil » 05 February 06 2:36 am

We both like puzzle caches, and have no problem with multis, my issue is with walking 12kms. We just wouldn't do it. Well Scott would- but neither myself nor our 8 yr old would do it.

12 kms is just not realistic for us. (One thing I thought though- I'd hope there were toilets along there somewhere- coz if you need to pee or poop and you're 6 kms from your car....its gonna be a squishy walk!)

M.

User avatar
zactyl
Posts: 1171
Joined: 28 July 04 6:40 pm
Location: Mullumbimby, NSW

Post by zactyl » 05 February 06 10:16 am

Team Red Devil wrote: 12 kms is just not realistic for us. (One thing I thought though- I'd hope there were toilets along there somewhere- coz if you need to pee or poop and you're 6 kms from your car....its gonna be a squishy walk!)

M.
You can go behind a bush! :D

User avatar
TeamAstro
5000 or more caches found
5000 or more caches found
Posts: 625
Joined: 01 April 04 10:57 pm
Location: Adelaide
Contact:

Post by TeamAstro » 05 February 06 10:26 am

zactyl wrote:
Team Red Devil wrote:
You can go behind a bush! :D
MMMM. Maybe this is worth a pole? So just how many cachers carry the appropriate gear (on those longer walks?). You know. Loo Paper, a shovel (of course you all bury your business), and a packet of matches to burn the paper so it's not uncovered by the next dingo/fox/dog etc....

clear skies, Astro

User avatar
zactyl
Posts: 1171
Joined: 28 July 04 6:40 pm
Location: Mullumbimby, NSW

Post by zactyl » 05 February 06 11:26 am

TeamAstro wrote:
zactyl wrote:
Team Red Devil wrote:
You can go behind a bush! :D
MMMM. Maybe this is worth a pole? So just how many cachers carry the appropriate gear (on those longer walks?). You know. Loo Paper, a shovel (of course you all bury your business), and a packet of matches to burn the paper so it's not uncovered by the next dingo/fox/dog etc....

clear skies, Astro
I've always just used a big leaf when in the bush without toilet paper. Biodegrades nicely! And it's easy enough to dig a hole in leaf litter with a stick.

A pole is for limbo, vaulting and dancing...

User avatar
ZED!
500 or more caches logged
500 or more caches logged
Posts: 308
Joined: 07 May 05 9:41 pm
Location: Jane Brook, WA
Contact:

Post by ZED! » 05 February 06 1:37 pm

I always carry loo paper even on the shorter walks even where there are toilet blocks nearby, how many times have you walked into a public toilet and there's no paper? It's a part of my kit, probably why I don't carry too many swaps, there's no room for them LOL TNLN<br>
<br>
Poll = 1. The casting and registering of votes in an election. 2. The number of votes cast or recorded.

Team Stargazer
150 or more caches found
150 or more caches found
Posts: 247
Joined: 02 June 03 11:19 pm
Location: Paralowie, Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Post by Team Stargazer » 05 February 06 10:54 pm

Why do people keep bagging multis? :?

Is it not just a simple case of if ya like 'em - do 'em ... if ya don't, then leave 'em alone.
There's an ever growing number of simple traditional caches out there flooding the place for you to take your minds off multis ... :roll:

Oh, BTW I didn't vote :P

Post Reply