Jump to content

Puzzle Caches


defamily

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone.

 

I am soon to submit a new series of puzzles however have noticed while reading some logs on other puzzles that cachers often seem to dislike puzzle caches as a whole.

 

They are our favourite type by far and we love creating them. We were wondering whether other people hated them as well or whether it was just a select few who were stating their opinion extremely loudly :P

 

Thanks

 

Defamily

Link to comment

Personally, I usually skip over the puzzle caches. I might click on them and check it out and if something jumps out at me I will try to solve it. If not, it goes on my ignore list. I know people that will spend hours solving them and then go out and get the smiley. So it's just a personal preference. I recently checked out the map for an area to see about caching there. It seemed to be more puzzle caches than any other kinds so I chose just to go caching somewhere else. Some puzzles I have loved. Just depends on the puzzle.

 

If you enjoy making the puzzles and the people in your area seem to enjoy solving them and visiting the caches then go for it. If your caches are not being visited, then I guess the puzzles are too hard or people in your area don't like puzzles. So, basically its all what you like.

Link to comment

I like puzzle caches on the whole. I have learned that now that I have done enough puzzles and created enough the following things are liked or disliked, at least in my area.

 

1. GeoArt puzzles, folks like those

2. Long Google Research puzzles, folks do not like those

3. Extremely narrow tough puzzles like computer programming, physics, will get you not many finds and many that do will just share the answers vs try them (not that there is anything wrong with that)

4. Make a puzzle where you can do a sudoku (though common) or some sort of visual cool manipulation, like a maze or some kind of game, folks will like those. They know what to do, just have to do it.

 

However, at least in Seattle, the # of puzzle finders has gone done from when I started paying attention 5 years ago. Just not that many finds for the average puzzle unless there is some big wow factor which is hard to do for any cache.

 

However, I like them, just do not make them too tough, read your mind, or just silly Google searching. If you have to do searching, make sure the answers are firm and concrete. Did a puzzle recently where you had to learn the auto ignition values for some chemicals like asphalt. Wish that CO would have realized there is not a common answer for that. Same with another one who did a puzzle about a city's history. Found many different answers from sources on that one.

Link to comment

I don't like puzzle caches.....I love being outdoors and the last thing I want to do is spend indoor time on computer search engines, etc in order to find caches. These puzzles also occupy space ( where you don't know which complicates hiding caches ) that could be used for REAL geocaches.

People travel to cache.....my highest % of finds is between 1000 and 2500 miles away. Once local people find your puzzle ALL the visitors will be travelers....my older caches are ONLY found by travelers. The vast majority of travelers do not include puzzles or multi's in their PQ's. I had a cache that had hundreds of favorite points but many travelers missed it because it was a multi.

Link to comment
I am soon to submit a new series of puzzles however have noticed while reading some logs on other puzzles that cachers often seem to dislike puzzle caches as a whole.

 

They are our favourite type by far and we love creating them. We were wondering whether other people hated them as well or whether it was just a select few who were stating their opinion extremely loudly

 

Select few. You will hear from them loudly in this thread.

 

Me, I love puzzle caches. Hide what you like; don't let others dictate your hiding style.

Link to comment

Personally I know many other fellow puzzle likers who will make sure to solve puzzles in the area and get them on a trip. I have a Hawaii trip planned and I have the ALOHA Geo Art all solved. Really enjoyed solving the puzzles in Reno for a trip. The only traditionals I will be getting are ones in areas I am planning to hit anyway, have high favorite points, or are old.

 

However, Bamboozle is probably right, would say the majority of travelers do not do that. Not a secret though, puzzle finds will be less than a traditional on average. Variety is nice I think.

Link to comment

We LOVE puzzle caches. Solving them is something we do for fun at night or rainy days when we don't go caching. We do generally shy away from the ones that are really complicated ciphers or math (just 'cause we aren't that great at them), but we always look for puzzles first when we go to a new area. Keep hiding them!

Link to comment

I don't like puzzle caches.....I love being outdoors and the last thing I want to do is spend indoor time on computer search engines, etc in order to find caches. These puzzles also occupy space ( where you don't know which complicates hiding caches ) that could be used for REAL geocaches.

People travel to cache.....my highest % of finds is between 1000 and 2500 miles away. Once local people find your puzzle ALL the visitors will be travelers....my older caches are ONLY found by travelers. The vast majority of travelers do not include puzzles or multi's in their PQ's. I had a cache that had hundreds of favorite points but many travelers missed it because it was a multi.

Not too sure you can comment on what the "vast majority of travelers" do or do not do. We travel all the time and always looks for puzzles first. Just sayin'

Everybody caches in the way they like best, and that's awesome because there is so much variety available. We don't like power trails, but we don't care if others enjoy doing them.

Link to comment

I like puzzles, so I like puzzle caches. People that don't like puzzles don't like puzzle caches. I don't think there's much more to it.

 

Exactly right. We have 200 puzzle caches out there and are known (negatively and positively) for our Micro Logic (ML) puzzles. Some love them when they come out and fight to solve them first. Others let their friends solve them and then go out as a group, and others share their solutions. We don't care because it's all geocaching.

The cachers who don't like the puzzles, and seem to judge us on that basis, often forget that we have placed hundreds of traditional caches, most as series on trails.

 

I agree with BAMBOOZLE that many travellers don't include puzzles in their itinerary. However, we live in a tourist area and we have had cachers from far away solve the ML caches and plan their vacations to pick them up. Also, in our case MA checks out puzzles prior to our caching trips and insists that we make an effort to deviate from our route to pick up some of them.

Link to comment

1. GeoArt puzzles, folks like those

 

I think the point is to get every puzzle so you get the whole GeoArt on your map. That means you have to be able to solve every puzzle and be physically fit enough to get all of the caches. It's frustrating not to be able to get the full GeoArt collection. If you're not keen on asking other finders for the answer and you're not smart enough to figure it out on your own, you are simply out of luck and can never expect to get all of the caches in a puzzle GeoArt piece.

 

3. Extremely narrow tough puzzles like computer programming, physics, will get you not many finds and many that do will just share the answers vs try them (not that there is anything wrong with that)

 

These are frustrating. Especially when the CO provides extra hints and I still don't get the computer lingo or the second year university math, yet somehow 60 people have claimed a find. It's frustrating when there's so much sharing going on - I haven't resorted to asking previous finders. Some owners have just given me the coordinates after emailing back and forth for 5 or 6 emails as I inch closer and closer to the answer but somehow I my mind doesn't grasp the brass ring. They take pity on me.

 

Sometimes it's not that the CO is all that brainy, it's that they found a book of puzzles or they found a puzzle creator that creates a puzzle for them and gives them the answer - so for them the puzzle seems easy. It's like teacher cheat sheets, or teacher text books that come with the answers in the back of the book.

 

I like the puzzles that are fun yet are meant to be solved by a majority of cachers.

 

I like puzzles that provide a decent hint about how to solve it.

 

I also like puzzles that include a geochecker.

 

And finally, I like puzzles that reward us for the extra effort we make by placing a swag size water tight container in a decent location (not a bison tube in a parking lot).

Link to comment
Hide what you like; don't let others dictate your hiding style.
+1

 

I think the most important factor for a cache owner is that you hide the kinds of caches you want to own and maintain for the long term. Some people will love your caches. Some will like them. Some will hate them. Some will ignore them. Some will consider them just another +1 notch in their belt.

 

If you want to own and maintain puzzle caches for the long term, then hide them. If kayak caches, then hide them. If ammo cans in alligator-infested swamps, then hide them. If thousands of fungible film canisters along a lonely desert highway, then :blink: sure, go ahead and hide them.

Link to comment

I both like and dislike puzzles as said here already. I really enjoy the ones I can solve. Some are just frustrating but if I ever get some time to check them out I might work on those as well. We also have out a bunch. The one thing I dislike about them is that it makes it harder to place a cache and know it is a OK location. We would never not like a puzzle because it blocked our cache as we have placed some that our own puzzle blocks. Just place what you like and want to place. Puzzles are fine and I know many cachers who only do puzzles.

Link to comment

I think the point is to get every puzzle so you get the whole GeoArt on your map. That means you have to be able to solve every puzzle and be physically fit enough to get all of the caches. It's frustrating not to be able to get the full GeoArt collection.

 

As long as enough caches exist that are attractive and suitable for person X (often not fulfilled however), I do not see any real reason for frustration. Personally, GeoArt has no attraction per se for me.

 

These are frustrating. Especially when the CO provides extra hints and I still don't get the computer lingo or the second year university math, yet somehow 60 people have claimed a find. It's frustrating when there's so much sharing going on - I haven't resorted to asking previous finders.

 

I do not regard such puzzles as frustrating. I tend to ignore those where I do not have the right knowledge/idea.

As sharing is regarded, that's one of the reasons why I'm so much against this culture of sharing solutions and one of the major reasons why I will react with archival if something like that happens for a difficult cache of mine.

 

I like the puzzles that are fun yet are meant to be solved by a majority of cachers.

 

You should have written "fun for you". From my experience I realized that I typically do not like the puzzles that are meant to be solved (!) by the majority of cachers. Most of the time they are boring or trivial for me and it feels just like tasks in the household that have to be done but that I do not like at all.

The background of the solver and his/her preferences play a major role.

 

I also like puzzles that include a geochecker.

 

Not necessarily true for me. Often a geochecker is used to make something unique which is not unique and it is used as an excuse for ill-posed questions.

Some puzzles can indeed profit from the geochecker but there are not too many where a geochecker is the best solution.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

I love solving puzzles! and I don't mind those requiring specialist knowledge. I've learned how to read music and programming code, and solved quite a few involving physics, or chemistry or boy bands (as long as it doesn't involve listening!)

 

What I find annoying with many puzzles (and yes, we're guilty of that as well) is a great puzzle, and a little film container or nano behind a traffic sign in a completely uninspiring area. Just try to be a bit more creative with your hide, either with regards to a fitting location or with a special container.

 

Mrs. terratin

Link to comment

It's well and good that you are concerned about what other geocachers enjoy and are wanting to make geocaches that will appeal. I would only caution that doing this might stifle your own creativity while also serving to homogenize what kind of caches exist. Diversity is a good thing, if everyone only created what they already knew others would like than the game would become boring (IMO). For me, creating the cache is as much fun as seeing the logs of those that find it. And I particularly enjoy creating geocaches/puzzles that I haven't seen the likes of before. If you enjoy creating something, no one can take that away from you. It doesn't really matter if it is well received by your local geocaching community or not. Have fun with the creative process, however that appeals to you and don't sweat the small stuff.

Link to comment

I generally like puzzle caches and i've learned new things while figuring out and/or researching how to solve them. I want to solve them by myself but some of them are so "off the wall", imo, that they are just about impossible to figure out. I'll usually end up ignoring those caches but i have to admit that there have been times when i've spent hours trying to figure them out to no avail. I've come to find that it sometimes depends on who is hiding them as to whether they are fun or not for me. There is one person's caches in our general area that i ignore completely because they are so tedious.

 

That being said, i don't dislike anyone for hiding caches that are too hard for me. I've always thought that we should be able to hide caches that are as easy or as difficult as we want. Hide what you like and if you want, you can adjust your hiding style later after you get a feel for what works. Just remember that you are dealing with people and no matter what you do, someone will complain. :anitongue:

Link to comment

Hide what you like. Diversity is a good thing.

 

I enjoy puzzles, and consider them a great way to pass time when I cannot cache (winter storms in particular are a great time to work on puzzles, I think). I often jokingly refer to cache puzzles as my "continuing education", although it really isn't much of a joke. I've learned (or at least been exposed to) a great many things over the course of my few years of caching, and that is never a bad thing as far as I'm concerned.

 

I like to see a geochecker because, although I'm willing to go after a puzzle based only on my solution (and indeed some of the more thrilling finds came that way), the further I need to travel from home the more I like to be sure I'm not wasting time and gas. Second to that, a cache owner who is responsive to emails asking for confirmation of solved coordinates is a very nice thing.

 

What I dislike is the kind of puzzle that basically boils down to a game of "guess what I'm thinking". I'm not saying the path to the solution needs to be immediately obvious or easily discerned, just that the path needs to exist. This is one reason I'm not a huge fan of vigenere type ciphers that require a passphrase, too often it becomes nothing more than guessing what the password is (there are certainly exceptions to this statement, some of them caches that I've enjoyed tremendously, but those were "done right" in my eyes).

 

Another thing I mostly dislike is red herrings. Those are OK on easier puzzles, but the harder the puzzle the less I like them. When it comes to a puzzle that is already going to take a great deal of time and effort to solve, muddying the water any more than needed is just mean. Multiple red herrings are even worse. In general I think that the use of red herrings to make a puzzle harder is the same as using soft coordinates to make a cache harder.

 

As for difficult puzzles, if that's what you have in mind, by all means go for it. You may get fewer finds, but those are the kinds of caches I enjoy the most. If it's a puzzle type that I've seen and solved repeatedly (i.e. sudoku variations, for example), I'll only do those if I know I'll be in the general area on a cache trip.

 

The advice given regarding travelers ignoring puzzles isn't wholly accurate. It only applies to spur of the moment caching or people who don't like to plan ahead, I think. Any cacher who likes to solve puzzles and knows in advance that they'll be traveling to a new area is almost certainly going to look at and attempt to solve puzzles in that area beforehand.

 

That's my two cents.

 

Actually, to be accurate, the first two sentences are my two cents on the subject and the rest is, I guess, fluff.

Link to comment

I like puzzles, so I like puzzle caches. People that don't like puzzles don't like puzzle caches. I don't think there's much more to it.

 

I like puzzles, but don't care for puzzle caches. I've just never really enjoyed merging the two together.

 

When my son was growing up and still at home, we loved doing text adventures on the old TI 99 computer. We would spend hours puzzling over the games. I really thought I would find the same joy in puzzle caches, but nether of us like them. :blink:

 

However, I really like the idea that there are many different kinds of caches out there for many different kinds of Geocachers to find. If everyone would hide what they like, there will be caches of every kind for every type of seeker to enjoy. It is usually easy enough to ignore the kind of cache you don't like, and still be happy that type is there for someone who does enjoy it. Do not rely on the forums to tell you what kinds of caches people like. There will always be someone here who doesn't like your kind of cache no matter what kind you hide. B):)

Link to comment

I like puzzles, so I like puzzle caches. People that don't like puzzles don't like puzzle caches. I don't think there's much more to it.

I like puzzles, but don't care for puzzle caches. I've just never really enjoyed merging the two together.

I guess I just don't try to merge them. I enjoy solving the puzzles. I enjoy going out to find the caches. I don't consider the latter significantly related to the former. (In many really good puzzle caches, the CO makes a connection between the hide and the puzzle, but that's just gravy.)

 

So for example, I've solved many puzzle caches in places I don't expect to ever visit, while, on the other hand, I don't worry about puzzle caches close to home that I can't solve or don't want to solve.

Link to comment

It's funny, but I'm more interested in creating puzzles than solving them. I do try to solve what I can, but quite often I just get hung up pretty easily.

 

We have a fellow in the area who churns out tons of puzzle caches, mostly ciphers...but he's also well-known for how many challenges he puts out. It's gotten so I just automatically ignore every challenge he puts out because they all are so tedious and impossible for most people - triply fizzy, quadruple fizzy, etc. One of his is "find every cache in Stone Mountain Park"...which will probably never happen since two of them are over a year old with zero finds and one is another challenge cache requiring a two-year streak.

Link to comment

It's funny, but I'm more interested in creating puzzles than solving them. I do try to solve what I can, but quite often I just get hung up pretty easily.

 

We have a fellow in the area who churns out tons of puzzle caches, mostly ciphers...but he's also well-known for how many challenges he puts out. It's gotten so I just automatically ignore every challenge he puts out because they all are so tedious and impossible for most people - triply fizzy, quadruple fizzy, etc. One of his is "find every cache in Stone Mountain Park"...which will probably never happen since two of them are over a year old with zero finds and one is another challenge cache requiring a two-year streak.

 

Uggh. Most of the challenge caches in my area are geared to power cachers. If you're a slo-mo savor-the-flavor type of geocacher who doesn't cache for numbers, you're out of luck when it comes to challenges. Challenge caches are another promotion of the numbers game in my opinion, my least favorite puzzle/unknown type.

Link to comment

Challenge caches are another promotion of the numbers game in my opinion, my least favorite puzzle/unknown type.

They don't have to be. Like any other cache, they reflect the people that create them. If there are types of geocaching related challenges that you like, create those. I own 3 challenge cache listings and none of them are geared towards power cachers.

Link to comment

We were wondering whether other people hated them as well

I set up my first Unknown cache specifically because I wanted it to be found less often than the others In the park. The plan worked perfectly. It's a quiet cache, non-muggled, ready to be found as I hid it. So, yeah, at least around here, cachers tend toward the less puzzling caches.

 

My cache's "puzzle" is not very hard.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

I set up my first Unknown cache specifically because I wanted it to be found less often than the others In the park. The plan worked perfectly. It's a quiet cache, non-muggled, ready to be found as I hid it. So, yeah, at least around here, cachers tend toward the less puzzling caches.

I didn't create my puzzle caches with the idea of discouraging the riffraff, and I don't seek puzzle caches because they are less often compromised by less talented seekers...but these are happy side effects.

Link to comment

Challenge caches are another promotion of the numbers game in my opinion, my least favorite puzzle/unknown type.

They don't have to be. Like any other cache, they reflect the people that create them. If there are types of geocaching related challenges that you like, create those. I own 3 challenge cache listings and none of them are geared towards power cachers.

 

I like your Dona Ana County Fav Cache Challenge. Doesn't encourage power caching, and it's about quality but not about excessively high favorite points. I may do something like this. Thanks.

Link to comment

I like your Dona Ana County Fav Cache Challenge. Doesn't encourage power caching, and it's about quality but not about excessively high favorite points. I may do something like this. Thanks.

 

That idea apparently works well in New Mexico. In my area even with increasing the number of caches and the number of required FPs it would not work nearly as well and it would not be necessarily about quality.

Hide 15 lame caches in a row and end with a 16-th lame one which is called bonus cache and this bonus cache will receive quite a number of FPs just with the argument to offer a reward for hiding 16 caches instead of only one.

Moreover, I know many caches with hideouts or background stories (including murder and necrophilia) that are beyond what I regard as acceptable for caches, but get awarded a considerable number of FPs.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

For me, it depends on the nature of the puzzle cache.

 

Some puzzles are dead simple but just too tedious to solve.

Some puzzles are just so difficult I don't even know where to start.

 

I love it when a cache hider hits the wonderful middle ground -- a puzzle that is written in such a way that it intrigues me or drags me into some sort of story and then feeds me just enough information to keep me interested in the solve.

 

Some of the magical ones have had me work on them for hours, days or weeks. I've had puzzles that have consumed me so much I have woken up in the middle of the night with a possible solution and had to run downstairs and try it right away.

 

There are other puzzles that I look at and say "Meh" and never look at again.

Link to comment

I (BC) don't like puzzle caches much, but have found myself creating a couple the past year. However, they are FIELD PUZZLES. Something that has to be manipulated, or solved manually at the cache in order to open it, or get to it.

Like Ms Kitty's Kiddy Puzzler

I think that a lot of folks aren't looking for them, because they see the "?" and don't read the cache description to see they aren't some mind bending cypher.

I want to let people know there is a (usually easy) field puzzle, so I select "unknown". I wish there was a different icon for field puzzles, rather than being lumped in "Unknown" because even though there is an attribute for "field puzzle", IMO, some folks are put off by the "?" Unknown and don't read further.

Edited by BC & MsKitty
Link to comment

I (BC) don't like puzzle caches much, but have found myself creating a couple the past year. However, they are FIELD PUZZLES. Something that has to be manipulated, or solved manually at the cache in order to open it, or get to it.

Like Ms Kitty's Kiddy Puzzler

I think that a lot of folks aren't looking for them, because they see the "?" and don't read the cache description to see they aren't some mind bending cypher.

I want to let people know there is a (usually easy) field puzzle, so I select "unknown". I wish there was a different icon for field puzzles, rather than being lumped in "Unknown" because even though there is an attribute for "field puzzle", IMO, some folks are put off by the "?" Unknown and don't read further.

I see those listed as regulars all the time.

Link to comment

I (BC) don't like puzzle caches much, but have found myself creating a couple the past year. However, they are FIELD PUZZLES. Something that has to be manipulated, or solved manually at the cache in order to open it, or get to it.

Like Ms Kitty's Kiddy Puzzler

I think that a lot of folks aren't looking for them, because they see the "?" and don't read the cache description to see they aren't some mind bending cypher.

I want to let people know there is a (usually easy) field puzzle, so I select "unknown". I wish there was a different icon for field puzzles, rather than being lumped in "Unknown" because even though there is an attribute for "field puzzle", IMO, some folks are put off by the "?" Unknown and don't read further.

I see those listed as regulars all the time.

 

And GC does have the Field Puzzle attribute to let people know it is what it is! I've seen puzzles listed as traditionals, complete with false coordinates. Those I give the benefit of doubt since they are likely grandfathered as being in place before the guidelines, but I'm not sure about a few. Unknown simply appears to mean "You Better Read the cache page first". Which is very good advice anyway for any cache IMO. I know I've done a few that were multis that required solving 'crypto' puzzles then hunting stages. Those were correctly rated... the field puzzle was at the coordinates posted... that was the easy part. Finding the regular container was both difficult and the coordinates accurate... loved that one. Also hated it for a bit.

Turned out to be simply two seasons of natural detritus.

 

Doug 7rxc

Link to comment

I was reading this thread a week or so ago and coincidentally a few field puzzles appeared in our area. I found they were quite imaginative and so I posted an item about field puzzles on the local geocaching site. The caches were listed as traditionals and I quoted the possible reason for that from this thread.

 

It now seems that our reviewer read my item or someone brought the caches to his attention because the caches have now been changed to unknown . Here is his very nice comment on the cache page.

*************

 

This cache has been re-evalutated and type upgraded. While I do not want to spoil any fun, a traditional cache should be found with no more then the posted Co-ordinates and simply sign the logbook. Anything further required changes the cache to an Unknown type.

 

Cache-tech

Geocaching.com Reviewer

 

*******************

Link to comment

I was reading this thread a week or so ago and coincidentally a few field puzzles appeared in our area. I found they were quite imaginative and so I posted an item about field puzzles on the local geocaching site. The caches were listed as traditionals and I quoted the possible reason for that from this thread.

 

It now seems that our reviewer read my item or someone brought the caches to his attention because the caches have now been changed to unknown . Here is his very nice comment on the cache page.

*************

 

This cache has been re-evalutated and type upgraded. While I do not want to spoil any fun, a traditional cache should be found with no more then the posted Co-ordinates and simply sign the logbook. Anything further required changes the cache to an Unknown type.

 

Cache-tech

Geocaching.com Reviewer

 

*******************

 

What is meant by 'field puzzle' in these cases? Are the caches not AT the posted coordinates?

 

There is one in my area that is hidden at the posted coordinates, but the log sheet itself is actually inside of a puzzle box that one must solve in order to sign it. To me that is still a traditional, but with a twist. If the field puzzle sends you elsewhere, you could probably also call it a multicache. I have seen this type listed as both a mystery and a multi in different places.

Link to comment

I was reading this thread a week or so ago and coincidentally a few field puzzles appeared in our area. I found they were quite imaginative and so I posted an item about field puzzles on the local geocaching site. The caches were listed as traditionals and I quoted the possible reason for that from this thread.

 

It now seems that our reviewer read my item or someone brought the caches to his attention because the caches have now been changed to unknown . Here is his very nice comment on the cache page.

*************

 

This cache has been re-evalutated and type upgraded. While I do not want to spoil any fun, a traditional cache should be found with no more then the posted Co-ordinates and simply sign the logbook. Anything further required changes the cache to an Unknown type.

 

Cache-tech

Geocaching.com Reviewer

 

*******************

 

What is meant by 'field puzzle' in these cases? Are the caches not AT the posted coordinates?

 

There is one in my area that is hidden at the posted coordinates, but the log sheet itself is actually inside of a puzzle box that one must solve in order to sign it. To me that is still a traditional, but with a twist. If the field puzzle sends you elsewhere, you could probably also call it a multicache. I have seen this type listed as both a mystery and a multi in different places.

 

I agree.

 

The reviewers note seems to imply if you have to do anything in the field (other then simply open the container and sign it) it needs to be unknown. But maybe I'm reading it wrong.

 

I've found lots of traditional caches which had a field puzzle (and were listed as traditionals). Also multi-caches which had one or more field puzzles in a stage which were listed as a multicache. The field puzzles ranged from a physical puzzle (e.g. container which is a maze, you need to complete the maze to open the box), to ones where you need to solve a puzzle to get a combination to open a lock... to multicaches where you need to solve a puzzle at stage 1 to get the coordinates of stage 2.

Link to comment

I was reading this thread a week or so ago and coincidentally a few field puzzles appeared in our area. I found they were quite imaginative and so I posted an item about field puzzles on the local geocaching site. The caches were listed as traditionals and I quoted the possible reason for that from this thread.

 

It now seems that our reviewer read my item or someone brought the caches to his attention because the caches have now been changed to unknown . Here is his very nice comment on the cache page.

*************

 

This cache has been re-evalutated and type upgraded. While I do not want to spoil any fun, a traditional cache should be found with no more then the posted Co-ordinates and simply sign the logbook. Anything further required changes the cache to an Unknown type.

 

Cache-tech

Geocaching.com Reviewer

 

*******************

 

What is meant by 'field puzzle' in these cases? Are the caches not AT the posted coordinates?

 

There is one in my area that is hidden at the posted coordinates, but the log sheet itself is actually inside of a puzzle box that one must solve in order to sign it. To me that is still a traditional, but with a twist. If the field puzzle sends you elsewhere, you could probably also call it a multicache. I have seen this type listed as both a mystery and a multi in different places.

 

I agree.

 

The reviewers note seems to imply if you have to do anything in the field (other then simply open the container and sign it) it needs to be unknown. But maybe I'm reading it wrong.

 

I've found lots of traditional caches which had a field puzzle (and were listed as traditionals). Also multi-caches which had one or more field puzzles in a stage which were listed as a multicache. The field puzzles ranged from a physical puzzle (e.g. container which is a maze, you need to complete the maze to open the box), to ones where you need to solve a puzzle to get a combination to open a lock... to multicaches where you need to solve a puzzle at stage 1 to get the coordinates of stage 2.

 

I agree 100% with the reviewer. Anything required other than going to the listed co-ords and signing a log is an ALR and should not be permitted in a traditional. ALR's are what puzzle caches are all about.

Link to comment

I agree 100% with the reviewer. Anything required other than going to the listed co-ords and signing a log is an ALR and should not be permitted in a traditional. ALR's are what puzzle caches are all about.

 

I do not agree and the fact that the fields puzzle attribute is available for traditionals and its usage has been suggested by reviewers in this forum for traditionals where it was appropriate supports my point of view.

 

Physical caches are required to involve a container and how difficult or easy it is to open a container is not an issue of the cache type provided.

 

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

I agree 100% with the reviewer. Anything required other than going to the listed co-ords and signing a log is an ALR and should not be permitted in a traditional. ALR's are what puzzle caches are all about.

 

The kind of caches Ma & Pa described do not involve ALRs in my view. The box is harder to open than just opening a box - but that is part of finding the cache, not an ALR (my view).

 

Now I can see the logic in saying any cache with a field puzzle needs to be listed as a puzzle/unknown, if it is defined that way.

 

In this guideline Field Puzzle

it does say:

 

"Field Puzzle: To be added to a geocache page when the geocache requires solving a puzzle during the activity of geocaching. Geocache types: Mystery/Puzzle geocaches (Unknown)."

 

That seems to say the Field Puzzle attribute can only be used with the Mystery/Puzzle type. So I can see why the reviewer is saying that. Though that is different to the common practice I've seen in my area.

Link to comment

For whatever reason over the years, the Traditional category has become less about what is tradition and more about whether there is any element other than going to the posted coordinates and finding the cache.

Traditionally, there was only one type of cache and people began to "enhance" caching experience by adding puzzles, mulitple-stages, problem solving, and phyisical challenges to caches. Some of these ideas were deemed early on to merit their own cache types - so multi-caches and mystery/unknowns got their own types. Later mutli-caches got defined to include offset caches - one where you would go to ground-zero and follow clue or work a simply puzzle in the field to get to the cache location. The mystery/unknown became a catch-all to include not just caches where the posted coordinates were bogus, but various kinds of challenge caches, ALR caches, and field puzzles to open or retrieve a cache. But even with the "catch-all" description, many cachers continued to list caches that were at the posted coordinates as traditionals, and the reviewers would publish the caches this way.

As paperless forms of caching became more popular people complained about arriving at a cache to find they didn't have the TOTT need to retrieve it. Had they read the caches page they may have known. Or they found an ALR to log the cache that they were unable or did not want to meet. In response to the complaints, I believe that Groundspeak clarified that such caches were best listed as mystery/unknown. Still many cachers hide caches with field puzzles or challenges that aren't mentioned on the cache page. The cache owner wants the user to figure out something when they get to the cache site. These continued to be listed as traditionals because the reviewer has no way of knowing there is a "surprise". What is looks like is this "traditional" style of being faced with have to thinking creatively when getting to the cache is being treated as more than "traditional" and some reviewers are requiring them to be listed as Mystery/Unknown.

Link to comment

For whatever reason over the years, the Traditional category has become less about what is tradition and more about whether there is any element other than going to the posted coordinates and finding the cache.

Traditionally, there was only one type of cache and people began to "enhance" caching experience by adding puzzles, mulitple-stages, problem solving, and phyisical challenges to caches. Some of these ideas were deemed early on to merit their own cache types - so multi-caches and mystery/unknowns got their own types. Later mutli-caches got defined to include offset caches - one where you would go to ground-zero and follow clue or work a simply puzzle in the field to get to the cache location. The mystery/unknown became a catch-all to include not just caches where the posted coordinates were bogus, but various kinds of challenge caches, ALR caches, and field puzzles to open or retrieve a cache. But even with the "catch-all" description, many cachers continued to list caches that were at the posted coordinates as traditionals, and the reviewers would publish the caches this way.

As paperless forms of caching became more popular people complained about arriving at a cache to find they didn't have the TOTT need to retrieve it. Had they read the caches page they may have known. Or they found an ALR to log the cache that they were unable or did not want to meet. In response to the complaints, I believe that Groundspeak clarified that such caches were best listed as mystery/unknown. Still many cachers hide caches with field puzzles or challenges that aren't mentioned on the cache page. The cache owner wants the user to figure out something when they get to the cache site. These continued to be listed as traditionals because the reviewer has no way of knowing there is a "surprise". What is looks like is this "traditional" style of being faced with have to thinking creatively when getting to the cache is being treated as more than "traditional" and some reviewers are requiring them to be listed as Mystery/Unknown.

 

WOW

 

Thanks for the great post with the history, reasoning, etc.

 

PAul

 

**********************

 

Here are the caches involved in my post

 

http://coord.info/GC4ZPMJ

 

http://coord.info/GC50F1G

 

http://coord.info/GC50JQ0

 

http://coord.info/GC50JT2

 

http://coord.info/GC50T62

 

.

 

.

Link to comment

 

That seems to say the Field Puzzle attribute can only be used with the Mystery/Puzzle type. So I can see why the reviewer is saying that. Though that is different to the common practice I've seen in my area.

 

Fortunately it does not work that way. The fields puzzle attribute is particularly important for certain types of multi caches. Suppose a multi cache where the final is 15 km from the start point and where somewhere along the way you might e.g. be confronted with a few pieces which need to be put together in the right way to obtain the next coordinates. It is not a good idea to classify such caches as mystery caches, first because it should not scare off those who do not want to spend time in front of their PC at home and second and more importantly because the cache then shows off in search lists near where it starts and not near where it ends (one might not even want to give this information away as a hider).

 

I use the fields puzzle attribute also wherever my multi caches require some knowledge not everyone necessarily has (e.g. a question could be take among the 3 persons whose names you find on the sign nearby the one who is not a composer - the sign will provide the names, but not the profession of the people). It would make absolutely no sense to classify such caches as puzzle caches because it is neither possible nor intended to do advance research at home.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment
The puzzle cache culture depends on part of the world where you live.
Definitely. I've found a number of mystery/puzzle caches where the container was located at the posted coordinates, but there was some puzzle aspect involved in opening/accessing the container and signing the log. Some were traditional puzzle boxes, some were locked with combination locks that required a puzzle solution to open, others were something else. I think listing these caches as mystery/puzzle caches makes a lot more sense than listing them as traditional caches. But apparently some would list them as traditional caches, because the containers are at the posted coordinates.

 

Consider the following:

 

Holmes has a PQ that includes only mystery/puzzle caches. What kinds of caches does he expect in his PQ results?

 

Watson has a PQ that includes only traditional caches. What kinds of caches does he expect in his PQ results?

 

Now, consider these on-site puzzles located at the posted coordinates. Which of the two will expect to see these caches in his PQ results? Which of the two will receive an unpleasant surprise when he discovers the true nature of these caches?

Link to comment

I think listing these caches as mystery/puzzle caches makes a lot more sense than listing them as traditional caches. But apparently some would list them as traditional caches, because the containers are at the posted coordinates.

 

Consider the following:

 

Holmes has a PQ that includes only mystery/puzzle caches. What kinds of caches does he expect in his PQ results?

 

Watson has a PQ that includes only traditional caches. What kinds of caches does he expect in his PQ results?

 

Now, consider these on-site puzzles located at the posted coordinates. Which of the two will expect to see these caches in his PQ results? Which of the two will receive an unpleasant surprise when he discovers the true nature of these caches?

 

It will depend a lot on the type of puzzle. If the puzzle is just to open a tricky container, then in my experience this type of cache appeals to those who like traditional caches (among them many filter out puzzle caches completely). I visit a lot of puzzle caches, but typically fail at caches with tricky boxes or get there very annoyed. If a traditional comes along with a fields puzzle icon and many favourite points, I'm warned and in most cases decide not to go there.

 

Those using PQs could easily add the fields puzzle attribute to their set of parameters for the PQ and then nothing unexpected will happen. Traditionals with the fields puzzle attribute set are a much smaller category and are much easier to select or to filter out on purpose as hiding such traditionals among the huge group of mystery caches. They appeal to different target audiences.

 

As tricky containers are regarded, where is the borderline where a puzzle starts? I can tell you several cases where many cachers I know open a container without any issues and it takes me from several minutes to not possible at all before I give up.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

You won't find it written in a guideline anywhere, but for me a sensible distinction would be:

 

- For field puzzles which need no advanced preparation or special tools: List as a Traditional or Multicache (if the cache or first stage is also at the posted coordinates).

 

- For field puzzles which require advanced preparation and/or special tools: List as a mystery/puzzle.

 

The reason being: whilst reading the cache page in advance is always a good idea, cachers generally expect to be able to find Trads and Multis without special preparation. (Unless it has a 5* rating which also indicates it could require special equipment).

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...