Re: Challenge Checker Request for GC56F47: Altitude Belt Challenge

Regarding GC56F47: Altitude Belt Challenge –

Is it possible to create a checker for this grand fathered cache?

Geocache Description:

And now one for those visitors that may not cache much here in Utah, but seem to get around.

Find one cache in every 250' altitude band up to 11,000

Then one cache over 11,000 feet. (part of me wanted to go higher, but I decided not to at this point)

Once again, Wherigos do not count. Letterboxes and Puzzle (challenge) caches will only count if they are at the cache coordinates. If they are not you will need to find another.

Thanks,

IowaBeaver

This should be fairly simple to do and I've started on something for this. However, I have a question and a comment:

For the first band, are negative elevations allowed? For example, can someone use any cache below 250' elevation for the first band?

Next up, in regards to Letterbox and Puzzle caches, I don't think we can add this clause. The checker API does not include a feature to determine if a cache has corrected coordinates (and it's extremely rare for a Puzzle cache to be at the same coordinates; wouldn't be much of a puzzle then), but since these caches are required to place coordinates within two miles of the final coordinates, I personally think it's safe to allow these. But what do you think?

I think the script used for https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCA0G13/71854 should help, but it will need some more tweaking to include the ability to filter out cache types, such as Wherigo caches.

@queengooborg - This script (https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC9J1YD/64166) has the ability to filter out cache types.

Yes, negative elevations are allowed.

Ok, include the puzzles and letterboxes.

Thanks,

IowaBeaver

Thanks for the quick replies! Based upon this, I've modified the script to allow for both filters and conversion of measurement units (elevation is reported in meters) to meet the desired result. Let me know what you think! https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC56F47/71893 (Note: I also told the script to ignore Locationless caches as I didn't think that would be desired -- let me know if I should add that back in though!)

And thanks for linking that script, Hügh! Unfortunately the script ended up timing out when I tested it on some qualifying players, due to how many finds they have. That script is pretty amazing though, I'll be sure to try it out one of these days!

This looks good.

Thanks,

IowaBeaver