It is demonstrative, not representative, but --- the one I prefer is a tractrix. Vertical scale is roughly dynamic intensity to the point of yield from recoverable injury to irrecoverable, beginning at the cusp (breaking stuff). X would be the respective will of the opponents in opposite sign -- from my perspective -- my willingness to engage on one side of the cusp and his will to disengage on the other side (that is actually the correct basis for the curve in question the "hundkurve" was literally described by a dog on a leash -- on one side the dog pulling the owner toward some item of attraction, and on the other the owner pulling the dog away from it -- so it is more than merely demonstrative in that sense.

The one I critique (the bell or quasi~parabolic) is one that I think most people *think* is better, a slow escalation and as nearing the peak, getting flatter, more hesitant, less steeply rising in intensity. Problem being the boundary is unclear and verging into the breaking or irrecoverable damage area is harder to avoid unintended, and to maintain near that peak, which is necessary, involves more variables, because the sign of the curve and the intensity both change too subtly in too wide an area to give clear signal where the gradient is going --giving an opponent a false sense perhaps, that you are withdrawing, and thus prolonging the engagement with false hope. Also the rounder curve encompasses more area under it, and thus accumulates more total harm both recoverable and unrecoverable.