Absolutely boring sitting there waiting an entire mintute for someone to take their turn in the DT and there is no reason for the round timer being that long. If they have bad internet or genuinly take that long to play then they are not going to win the DT anyway it just adds un-needed variance to the DT where you can just get slow players and lose because it and thats not very fun.
From my part, I agree it can be annoying facing slow players. However, the game times have reduced already if I recall correctly. So, I still think facing a slow player isn't game changing to your result. I agree that time per round can decrease in r2, 3 and r4. But sometimes r1 can have a bug or it is slowly starting. In this cases I fastly switch to my phone and can still move on. Therefore 60 seconds r1 seems okay to me.
Queueing into the same player lots of times is annoying, but can be solved by quickly forfeiting the match with limited time loss.
All in all, I think we are used to the concept of slow players and everyone faces them. Changes in time are okay, but I think you have to give people time in r1 to either set up correctly or think about what they want to do. In the long run (1 dt) every player will have played a wide variety of players (slow/fast, counterdeck by you or the other, bad/good) and I don't think it matters that much. Of course there are annoying exceptions.
"If they have bad internet or genuinly take that long to play then they are not going to win the DT anyway it just adds un-needed variance "
Also, I think only a maximum of 5 players per dt are actively trying to win the dt. For the rest the dt is filled by persons that want to have fun/do missions or don't have the skills or deck to win it. If you only want players in the dt that want to or can win the dt, you have even less players than currently.
"Sorry sean but I don't think you can talk on this matter, you've only came top 10 in a DT once, I don't think you're experienced enough to understand this issue and i disagree with your solution."
Most blatant ad hominem I've seen in a while.
It's not that hard to understand really, we're not talking astrophysics. As others have mentioned, the time is fine, it theoretically cancels out as you'll face a variety of opponents. Luck is part of it, sometimes you'll draw people who'll leave the game and give you some quick points or timeout when they would have won, part of the game, but probability and high number of games should standardize it across the board. You have to let some time, or else new players will be intimidated, it's not just the top 10 competing, but everybody even if "they won't win anyways".
Wow an actual reason why that would be a bad idea instead of someone repeating the same thing again, thanks sylneiros, but I do wonder if there even are that many new players nowadays, if there is though that would be a good reason not to make the change.