Hello

Recently a fellow cacher & I discovered the remnants of a cache that had been destroyed by vandals; and in my book that was akin to finding the cache, however my colleague insisted no not officially because the log book was destroyed and was not at posted co-ordinates. Understandably we were dissapointed, vandalism + no reward for finding & reporting issue. Perhaps could at least 1 or 2 points be awarded for logging either "Did not Find" or "Needs Maintenance" ? This way at least one gets consolation for trying & reporting valuable info. It seems odd that you get 0.5 points for visiting the dz page, yet zero for being active, in this case.

Zone Bassendean has 3 caches controlled by that presumably are archived as none appear in zone's map or GCA list. This is somewhat "unfair" if cache's can no longer be found to facilitate change in zone control. Perhaps consider if a cache is not re-activated after a suitable period of time (e.g. 6-12 months) after being archived, then its dz points become zero. Thus (all other things being equal) Bassendean eventually becomes neutral, until a new cache added into the zone.

Moveables are designed to be moved, not sit in people's homes, right? I've noticed large numbers of moveables with a green tick icon next to them, rather than blue arrow; i.e. unavailable. What incentive can be made to motivate people to move the cache after finding? For example, not allowing them to allocate points to the cache until after logged as moved? This way people who find the cache but not take it also unable to allocate 'bonus' points for their being lazy in not moving it, right? Alternately, an incentive for it to be moved x number weeks of finding, the sooner the better; thus not hoarded indefinately? [stick/punishment] Perhaps dz points be deducted from their total, at rate 1 point per week (after 2 weeks grace), as penalty until they log the cache into new location? Or [carrot/reward] +10 points if moved within same week, +9 after 1 week, +8 after 2 weeks... so on until 0 points after ten weeks expired?
Additionally, separate issue, perhaps consider new GPS co-ordinates must be more than 200m away from previous post? Thus new co-ordinates cannot be same as previous with just one digit changed; for those too lazy to move. [low priority issue]

Regards,
Laz

As the game designer, I'm happy to see feedback.

The game based on the usual actions of geocaching. While there are some people who pride themselves on the DNF count, it's not usually something people bandy about as a goal. A DNF, for the game purposes is not auditable. In a worst case scenario, you log a hundred DNF's because you didn't find the cache. True. But you DNF'd them because you didn't try. i.e. I can sit of my sofa and think about a geocache and then log a DNF because I didn't find it. So you get nothing for a DNF because there is nothing to convince the general community that you were there. Sure you can fake a find but sooner or later you'll get called on that by the community. So DNF's or needs maintenance, etc, are not worth anything to the game because they cannot be audited.

You get 0.5 for visiting the page to encourage you to look at any news that might come up. Bonus days, weekends, weeks and fortnights are occasionally announced via the news on that page. Visit and see it. Don't visit and miss it.

A geocache which is archived was part of the game and in my design, stays part of the game. Let me just be a horrible persona for a moment. There are just 3 geocaches that stop my clan from controlling a zone. I don't have enough points to take control of them. There are not many people of my clan around me. So the best way to take control of the zone is to steal / damage the geocaches, get them archived and ... tada. Instant win for me. That's an extreme example, but that's one of the reasons archived caches stay in the game. Another reason is that geocaches might survive years and contribute to the game, handing control back and forth as the points accumulate for different clans. To simply remove that cache from the points when it gets archived reduces the value of the find and the game for many cachers over the years. If you really want to garner control of a zone, hide more. Then they will get found and then more get hidden and more get found. By leaving all geocaches in play, it will (I suspect) drive additional hides in the area.

Movables are designed to be moved. But the move is not auditable (like a DNF). Anyone can audit a find log as there should be an entry on the log book. I can move it 1km, then 1k, then 1k, then 1k, then another 1km in a few clicks of the mouse before finally letting it rest. That would be 5 moves worth of points for me whereas in reality, it's one move and 4 fakes. A find can be faked and you will get called on it by the community. So my allowing only finds, I try and ensure that the points can (if necessary) be audited.

So the essence of the game is to find a geocache. DNF, move, NA, NM do not count. Geocaching is about finding the caches. Archived geocaches are part of the history of the game and remain in play as part of that history.

I appreciate the thoughts and feedback even though the game may not change as a result.

Thank you for you long detailed explanation.
Yes there may be ways to cheat, per any game; though my limited experience people are quite honest thus far.
Also note I have found some moveables without a logbook, thus not auditable. I acknowledge traditionally people like paper logs but also acknowledge people today embracing technology and virtual logs.
Perhaps time for another game this Spring to get moveable's moving again outside????

Thanks for understanding. I try to minimise opportunity for, er gaming the game wherever I can to keep it all above board. Sometimes peoples competitive nature can override their fun factor.

There is a senate discussion about a summer game again this year so if you're interested in getting it going, please by all means, pester your senator. They're the decision makers. The activity needs to start planning now so we're ready in time. There is a heap of programming to get done once the decision to proceed has been taken.

crew 153 Queensland
firnsy WA
LouiseAnn Victoria
Richary NSW
Sol de Lune ACT

No need to pester me Laz, I have already voiced my support for a summer game and will continue to support the idea.

So what would pestering look like?
And can we make a rule in the next game that senators, or at least ACT ones, can't play?

I understand what you are suggesting here, however it is possible to find a GCA moveable without actually taking it to move. Just look at how many moveables are still listed as being located at Stanthorpe Showground in QLD that were obviously taken to the mega. Lots of finds there but whoever took them hasn't rehidden (I did a PQ for Qld as there is a slight chance I will need to go there for work next week - though not to Stanthorpe). I forgot to look for moveables on the table there, that could have bumped the find count a bit

However I can see the merit in your bonus point scheme for a quick move, and I also get why C@W is saying it could be used to game the system by multiple moves. Though I would have thought the code could have allowed for only one bonus allocation for a move following a find. Though the last finder may not be the mover in a situation like this where a number of game pieces end up at an event.

Perhaps an e-mail could be sent to all those attended Stanthorpe to track them down?
Introduce a short "Spring Clean Moveable Amnesty" game?
Cheers

Oi! Mind your manners you.

Okay,
I'm so sorry to be a pest about how dZ points work, but I'm now confused as to how a zone gets it's points.
I thought the zone points related to the number of dZ caches controlled by a clan, however, I've found a zone where the zone points are different to the number of caches/trigs controlled by the clans. I'm not willing to share where I am looking in a public forum, so I can privately send you the zone I'm looking at if that helps . Keep the other clans guessing which state and zone I'm visiting soon.

Have I still got the points system wrong, or are there archived caches holding control? If that were the case, does that mean that I could create a bunch of caches, add a bunch of points to them, then promptly archive them so no one can change control of them, thus monopolising a zone... not that I would - I play fair. Just doesn't seem right if that is the issue.

Caches will always contribute to control. So archived caches, if they were controlled by a clan will continue to contribute to clan control.

A sneaky, horrible, likely to get a suspension approach would be to create 10 caches, allocate points and archive them. You retain control of the zone even if all the other caches are controlled by another clan.

Of course, the other clan simply does the same and you are now at an escalation of list, archive, repeat. It's not worth doing, we know it can be done and you'll get a suspension if you do it.

This is part of why providing data for your strategic game play is a challenge. Either everyone gets to use it so there is no strategy, or y'all do the strategising from the raw data and no-one knows what you're doing.

Oh, wow! I just realised, when I created my first trig I allocated points to it before realising I had it listed all wrong, archived the mistake, and created a new listing. That means I have unknowingly been guilty of committing such a felon. Now that I think about it, one that I accidentally placed just over the border of private property and had to remove may have had the same.

Will recycling these cache listings for new hides fix the problem?

Also, is there a place you can upload images to your own gallery without having to add them to a cache gallery?

Mistakes are mistakes are mistakes. Ne penalty. Place a retracted log against them to get them out of the scoring system.

We are not an image host, so caches get images, logs get images, you don't

Thanks.
I was just following an old forum posts instructions on how to get an image in your forum post. Just looking for somewhere other than a cache log to put them.

What does a "retracted" log consist of? It obviously isn't a log type choice. Is it a note?