All reports
Cuttle reports
#157232: "Use 9 One-Off effect against point cards"
implemented: This suggestion has been implemented
1
What is this report about?
What happened? Please select from below
Suggestion: in my opinion, the following would greatly improve the game implementation
Detailed description
• Please explain your suggestion precisely and concisely so that it's as easy as possible to understand what you mean.
Tried to use a 9, but the ability was grayed out. It said move effect to top of pile. It should move any card to the top of the deck regardless of what it is.• Which browser are you using?
Safari v18.3
Report history
Feb 10th 2025 14:40 • mrfixsimmons • Bug has not been reproduced by developers yet:
Could not use 9 ability. Not sure if this was from the deck 9 option that was checked.
Feb 10th 2025 16:53 • PatrickDNerd • This is not a bug:
I double-checked the rules on Pagat.com (the most definitive source I can find for Cuttle rules)
www.pagat.com/combat/cuttle.html
The 9 should only be able to target active Permanent Effects on the table (even with the Deck Nines alternative rule). The game appears to be acting correctly in this case.
www.pagat.com/combat/cuttle.html
The 9 should only be able to target active Permanent Effects on the table (even with the Deck Nines alternative rule). The game appears to be acting correctly in this case.
Feb 11th 2025 16:47 • PatrickDNerd • This suggestion has not been analyzed by the developers yet:
Just clarified that cuttle.cards implementation allows the 9 to work against any card in play, not just effects.
Since the balanced rules are inspired by the cuttle.cards variant, I'm okay making this change, but I would like to make sure it would be good for the game.
Most of the changes cuttle.cards made from the base rules are clarified in a discussion on Discord or a Reddit thread, but I cannot find any reference to this difference.
I basically want to make sure it wasn't an accident that just continued to be propagated.
Since the balanced rules are inspired by the cuttle.cards variant, I'm okay making this change, but I would like to make sure it would be good for the game.
Most of the changes cuttle.cards made from the base rules are clarified in a discussion on Discord or a Reddit thread, but I cannot find any reference to this difference.
I basically want to make sure it wasn't an accident that just continued to be propagated.
Feb 11th 2025 17:18 • PatrickDNerd • Developers would like more information about this suggestion:
If anybody can find reference to why cuttle.cards chose to make this change from the traditional rules, please post a link to it here!
Feb 11th 2025 20:23 • mrfixsimmons • Developers would like more information about this suggestion:
I asked on the cuttle.cards discord. They have a little history and community for the game:
As noted in the "variations" section of the pagat page, this effect, as written is almost **entirely** useles, as the opponent can simply play the returned card on their next turn, at which poitn we are in the exact same situation with the sole change of the person who played the nine no longer having the nine in their hand
This means that in the exact wording on pagat, the only time where playing a 9 for its effect would matter at all is a time where it immediately wins you the game (because you targeted a jack), and the only time that this would be any more beneficial than simply playing the 9 for points is when the player with the 9 has exactly 11 points and their opponent has previously jacked a 10
That's an interesting scenario but it clearly doesn't succeed at delivering an effect that captures the feeling of "sending things back" while being paractiaclly useful
cuttle.cards actually predates the update to the "Variations" section where the suggestion for forcing opponents to wait an additional turn was added to the pagat page (only under variations)
When I was first learning the game with my sister back around 2013, it was quickly clear that the 9's effect as written wasn't useful. We aimed to make a minimal change to make the effect usable, while preserving its feel. That's why we landed on the same idea you now see in the pagat page: requiring the opponent to wait an additional turn to play the returned card
As noted in the "variations" section of the pagat page, this effect, as written is almost **entirely** useles, as the opponent can simply play the returned card on their next turn, at which poitn we are in the exact same situation with the sole change of the person who played the nine no longer having the nine in their hand
This means that in the exact wording on pagat, the only time where playing a 9 for its effect would matter at all is a time where it immediately wins you the game (because you targeted a jack), and the only time that this would be any more beneficial than simply playing the 9 for points is when the player with the 9 has exactly 11 points and their opponent has previously jacked a 10
That's an interesting scenario but it clearly doesn't succeed at delivering an effect that captures the feeling of "sending things back" while being paractiaclly useful
cuttle.cards actually predates the update to the "Variations" section where the suggestion for forcing opponents to wait an additional turn was added to the pagat page (only under variations)
When I was first learning the game with my sister back around 2013, it was quickly clear that the 9's effect as written wasn't useful. We aimed to make a minimal change to make the effect usable, while preserving its feel. That's why we landed on the same idea you now see in the pagat page: requiring the opponent to wait an additional turn to play the returned card
Feb 11th 2025 20:25 • PatrickDNerd • Developers would like more information about this suggestion:
That all makes sense, and is how the game is implemented here (card returned by 9 One-Off cannot be played on the next turn).
The specific question here is whether or not the 9 One-Off should be used only on Permanent Effects, or if it should be useable against point cards as well.
The specific question here is whether or not the 9 One-Off should be used only on Permanent Effects, or if it should be useable against point cards as well.
Feb 14th 2025 2:10 • PatrickDNerd • This suggestion has been implemented:
After some deliberation and research, I decided to implement this one.
It should be immediately active in all games, just refresh the page if necessary.
It should be immediately active in all games, just refresh the page if necessary.
Feb 15th 2025 5:00 • PatrickDNerd • This suggestion has been implemented:
Report short description
"9 did not let me use ability"
changed to
"Use 9 One-Off effect against point cards"
"9 did not let me use ability"
changed to
"Use 9 One-Off effect against point cards"
Add to this report
Please add here anything that seems relevant in order to reproduce this bug or understand your suggestion:
- Another table ID / move ID
- Did F5 solve the problem?
- Did the problem appear several times? Every time? Randomly?
- If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
