[Precarious]

I see people are generally disinclined to follow the Tps hiding strategy (note that this strategy assumes a mislynch; should we lynch correctly, further consideration of our options is necessary). So let me reiterate why it works--or if it doesn't, please let me know. It's counterintuitive, but that's not a reason to dismiss it.

It's currently either 6:1 or 5:1:1. If it's 6:1, Tps can't actually hide, and there's only one remaining wolf (in that scenario, him). Therefore, if it 6:1, we can mislynch twice, and still be at 2:1 two mornings from now. As a result, a 6:1 scenario isn't (or at least shouldn't be) dangerous to us in a long-term perspective.

If it's 5:1:1, a mislynch takes us to 4:1:1. A lot of things can then happen in the night, but there are three obvious targets for the wolf and SK: the three confirmed or pseudo-confirmed town players. They might try to find each other, but I think we can give them more of a reason to do so.

Let's call the three assumed targets A, B, and C. If wolf targets A, there's only a 1/3 chance SK will do so as well. Admittedly, Tps has the option to hide anyway without telling anyone, but he'd still likely default to the confirmed players, since there would be a 2/3 chance of hiding behind anti-town if he hid elsewhere (assuming he hides at all).

In short, with a mislynch, it seems more probable than not that we're at 2:1:1 tomorrow--which is game over for us. At 2:1:1 there are only two possible timelines--a 1:1:1 draw-loss, or a 2:1 where the remaining antitown can kill with impunity at night, resulting in a 1:1 full loss/antitown victory.

However, if Tps publicly states an intention to hide behind either Sun or Cel (it's important not to say which one), the calculus changes. A 2:1:1 tomorrow is an acceptable if risky outcome for both wolf and SK, because either can still achieve their win condition; they just need to lynch the other. However, things change with the possibility of three town deaths rather than two. If both wolf and SK attack B and C, and hit the 50/50 chance of choosing separate targets, they lose too. We go into tomorrow already at 1:1:1 and the game immediately ends.

Therefore, having Tps hides significantly increases the risk to both wolf and SK of an undesirable outcome. Instead, both would be more incentivized to hunt the other. After all, if the wolf kills the SK, or the SK kills the wolf, then the possibility of the 1:1:1 is averted, and normal win conditions prevail for all remaining players.

There are several downsides here. If one or both attacks A*, we'd still be at 2:1:1 tomorrow--but how is that any worse than the existing possibility. It's also possible under both the No Hide and Hide strategies that both double up on a non-cloaking town player, resulting in 3:1:1, or that one or both kills the other. But in all scenarios other than 2:1:1, we retain a chance to win. Thus, Tps hiding, as far as I can tell, would counterintuitively increase our chances of winning the game.