# SOP — Game Crafter Deep-Dive for Cascade

**Date:** 2026-07-03
**Session goal:** Determine whether The Game Crafter (TGC) can host the Cascade substrate as a print-on-demand physical product, and capture all evidence needed for third-party (ghojualamanchu) review.
**Operator:** tenchi
**Second reader / drafter:** Zo
**Status:** Draft v1 — pending third-party review

---

## 1. Purpose

This SOP documents the work done on 2026-07-03 to evaluate The Game Crafter (thegamecrafter.com) as a host platform for the Cascade relational substrate. It is meant to be **reproducible** — a second operator following these steps should reach the same evidence set and the same open questions.

It is not a final design document. The intent is to gather enough engineering-grade facts (component specs, pricing, customizability, fit math) that a third-party reviewer can render a verdict on viability without re-doing the platform research.

## 2. What we were trying to answer

Three questions, in order:

1. **Catalog fit:** Does TGC have components that map to the Cascade substrate (hexagonal grid, 7 rings, 127 hexes, 5 currencies, 5 warmth bands)?
2. **Print spec viability:** Can a 127-hex map physically fit on a TGC board product, and if so, which one?
3. **Course-distribution path:** Can TGC's wholesale / concierge / API channels support cohort-level distribution (Cohort Zero, future cohorts)?

## 3. What we did, in order

### Step 1 — Orient on the platform (read-only research)

- Read `thegamecrafter.com/` home page (saved to conversation workspace)
- Read `/make/products` (product catalog index)
- Read `/make/getting-started` (designer workflow)

**Output:** Confirmed TGC is a print-on-demand marketplace, founded ~2010, designer keeps IP, 11 component categories, mix-and-match composition into "games" (their unit of sale).

### Step 2 — Enumerate the catalog

Used the SPA-rendered `/make/products` index to extract all 100 visible product names across 11 categories. Identified the hex-family and fold-family as Cascade-relevant.

**Output:** Master product list, with these flagged as candidate substrates / components:
- `HexDeck` — hex-shaped card stock
- `HexMat` / `LargeHexMat` — printed hex surfaces
- `LargeHexTile` / `MediumHexTile` — 2mm chipboard hex tiles
- `HexShard` — small hex pieces
- `LargeQuadFoldBoard` — 4-panel foldable substrate
- `MediumSixFoldBoard` — 6-panel foldable substrate
- `BiFold` — 2-panel option
- `LargeDualLayerBoard` — premium 2-layer variant
- Foil/non-foil Tarot Deck, Jumbo Deck — alternative card formats

### Step 3 — Specs and pricing (per-component)

Opened each candidate product page and extracted:
- Finished dimensions (mm)
- Material (gsm, thickness, stock type)
- Print area (px for template-based design)
- Base material cost + per-slug cutting cost
- Volume pricing (single / 100 / 1000)
- Per-piece weight
- Whether the surface is full-bleed (back + face) or single-side
- Template format (PSD / SVG / PNG / etc.)

**Output:** Spec sheet in `cascade-game-crafter-analysis.md` §2.

### Step 4 — Fit math (engineering)

- Confirmed 127-hex close-packing geometry from the existing v2 foundation (`sources/fact-check-notes.md` claim 7).
- Computed the bounding-box aspect ratio of a 7-ring hex grid: ≈ 3:2 width:height.
- Compared to TGC board aspect ratios:
  - Quad-Fold (508×508mm): **1:1** — too square, R6 hexes clipped at corners OR 4-board required.
  - Six-Fold (508×508mm, 6 panels): also 1:1, but 6 panels allow a 2×3 grid arrangement that **preserves the 3:2 ratio** and contains the full 127-hex map.
  - Bi-Fold: 254×254mm — too small.
- Conclusion: Six-Fold is the better substrate if we go board-route. Quad-Fold requires 4 boards to capture the full map (2×2 grid → still 1:1, doesn't help). Alternative: split map across multiple boards.

**Output:** Fit analysis in `cascade-game-crafter-analysis.md` §3.

### Step 5 — Concierge / wholesale / API check

Read `/concierge` and `/developer` to evaluate cohort-distribution options.

- **Concierge:** Yes, available. Custom quote for bulk orders. Designer keeps IP.
- **Developer API:** `developer.thegamecrafter.com` — exists, OAuth2, allows programmatic game / product creation.
- **Wholesale:** Implicit in concierge + volume pricing tiers.

**Output:** Distribution path options in `cascade-game-crafter-analysis.md` §5.

### Step 6 — Draft handoff for third-party review

Wrote a focused handoff document listing the open questions a third-party ghojualamanchu needs to resolve before we commit to a TGC build.

**Output:** `handoff-to-third-party-ghojualamanchu.md` in this folder.

## 4. Decisions taken in this session

- ✅ **Cascade can be physically represented on TGC.** Component set is sufficient.
- ✅ **Hex-family components are 95×83mm — uniform across the family.** One template system, multiple substrates.
- ⏸️ **No commitment to substrate choice yet** (deferred to third-party review).
- ⏸️ **No commitment to distribution path yet** (deferred to third-party review).
- ✅ **The "Pattern as hex content" question (Cohort / Location / Utility / Expression) is design-level, not platform-level** — it can be implemented via hex labels on the printed tiles without affecting the TGC build.

## 5. Anti-patterns to avoid

- **Don't commit to a build before the third-party review.** The handoff document lists the open questions; the third party may surface constraints we missed.
- **Don't treat TGC as a substitute for the digital Cascade app.** The board is a reflection surface, not the substrate. The Oscillator Model still operates in time, not on paper.
- **Don't over-fit to TGC's catalog.** If a Cascade component needs something TGC doesn't have (e.g., variable warmth, dynamic warmth bands), build it digital, not physical. The board is a snapshot, not a feed.
- **Don't suppress unresolved questions to ship faster.** The four open questions in the handoff are the reason for the third-party review.

## 6. Outputs checklist

A complete 2026-07-03 run produces:

- [x] `SOP-2026-07-03-game-crafter-deep-dive.md` (this file)
- [x] `cascade-game-crafter-analysis.md` (the engineering analysis)
- [x] `handoff-to-third-party-ghojualamanchu.md` (the review brief)
- [ ] Third-party review response (out of scope for this session)
- [ ] Substrate decision (deferred to post-review)

## 7. Source citations

- The Game Crafter home: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/
- Product catalog: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products
- Hex Deck: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products/HexDeck
- Large Hex Tile Set: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products/LargeHexTile
- Large Hex Mat: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products/LargeHexMat
- Hex Shard: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products/HexShard
- Large Quad-Fold Board: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products/LargeQuadFoldBoard
- Medium Six-Fold Board: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products/MediumSixFoldBoard
- Bi-Fold: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/make/products/BiFold
- Concierge: https://www.thegamecrafter.com/concierge
- Developer API: http://www.thegamecrafter.com/developer/
- 127-hex close-packing verification: `anthrocybernetics-foundation-v2/sources/fact-check-notes.md` claim 7

---

*This SOP lives in `Cascade/` as the process record. The engineering analysis is in `cascade-game-crafter-analysis.md`. The third-party brief is in `handoff-to-third-party-ghojualamanchu.md`.*