You should really stop telling this. With a hard fork, there is no "orphan risk", you just have two chains, two coins, and that's it.
lol you really have been fed the spoon of blockstream
"hard fork" is an umbrella term with several possible outcomes below it.
its whoevers script you have read that has sold you into thinking that soft = 1 result best case scenario. and then stroked ur head into thinking only good things will happen
Of course I don't think that. My favorite scenario is where bitcoin successively hard forks into several different coins. It is not a good thing that essentially all crypto is centralized into one single chain. A single crypto, and a single chain, is also a form of centralization that should be broken.
But what I *prefer* is independent of how I think that the dynamics works. And you are entirely confused about how hard forks work, because you still talk about "common chain height", orphaning, and so on.
So although my preferred scenario is where bitcoin hardforks into many different coins, I think this will not happen as long as bitcoin carries with it its first mover advantage: this has to erode away first. And it might very well be that bitcoin will not be used as a transaction medium before this happens: as mainly a vault-reserve currency, where the meager transaction volumes are used to settle between institutional players ; or as an immutable ledger with limited space, that is sold for a lot of money by miners (and the coin is just an app coin that doesn't matter any more, as it is more expensive to move it than the coin's value).
I don't know what will be the outcome for bitcoin.
