We have not received permission from hleV to share the quoted post.
I don't see how you reached this conclusion
exactly
, but if I go with it...
The PvE player does not have an explicit choice to engage in PvE as a way of trying to defeat the PvP skill of the PvP player in most games. If Ashes provides this as a small number of other games does, great.
The PvP player always has the choice of either 'trying to win in PvE' or 'trying to win in PvP', but they should obviously (let's assume builds are different) focus on the PvP using their skill because they 'would lose the PvE'. They don't need to 'request the terms of the contest'.
If 'an enemy Mob seeing their Player target get attacked' would immediately switch all adds/some portion of hate to the challenger, forcing that Challenger to PvE, then that would be 'fair'. Similarly, the PvP player going 'ok I'll prove I can beat them almost as well as you, so duel for spot', would be sensible, if it could be incentivized or maintained.
Corruption is the incentive.
If a PvX player had enough skill in PvE to make life difficult for the PvE player they are challenging for the spot, then they should do as
@NiKr
implied. Outfarm. They could even say 'You want to duel for this spot or should we compete for the farm?' or similar.
A game with a good culture or mechanics to incentivize these things would be better than a game where the optimal solution of the PvP player is, for example 'debuff and hit the PvE player while they are mid-combat and hope the mob kills them', and where the optimal solution of the PvE player is better than 'figure out a way to drop too many enemies into the cleave range of the PvP player who chooses not to PvP (to avoid corruption) so that they die'.