a number of forks will be launched, with different capabilities and tradeoffs
No need to have clusterfuck of forks trying, because in my opinion that's the most simple way to handle it:
If we would have four years long network difficulty regression - then it's emergency, and new code handling such danger - should delay halving to the next halving, until difficulty will recover
if there is no such emergency situation - there is no trigger, and old and new code would work together like a charm = so there is no hard fork at all
simple, conservative (and beautiful) solution in my opinion, so it fits to Bitcoin very well
such a solution is fueled 100% by free market only and the natural inflation level is set by Bitcoin itself, on some certain, completely unpredictable level (so, free market in its finest)
That's a good point. If only forks off when the condition for delaying halving is met, and if it does, it does so for an arguably good reason. Tail emissions may not address the issue at all if it crops up before they would kick in.
No need to have clusterfuck of forks
I don't think anybody can stop forks. It comes down to market demand and social consensus.