I care more about making a better game, than being as close as possible to older Gwent versions. But Gwent having 6 rows is not only something that defines this game, but it's something this game depends on. It's a game design that works independently, opening possibilities that would be impossible otherwise.
But Gwent has never fully embraced its rows, mostly because to not get "too complex". Because it was originally a side-game in Witcher, and now a game to satisfy Witcher fans, casual card gamers. This is were CDPR treads wrong, you shouldn't continue making Gwent just for your casual Witcher fans, but actually try to make an objectively great game. You wrongly think that adding more variables, like "Range indicators" or "Shared Melee row" (obviously a better solution than 4 rows) would increase game's complexity a lot, when in fact it will almost stay the same, providing you for more flexible ways to balance cards. 2 vs 2 rows Gwent is no longer Gwent, and is no longer a game with same many possibilities as a 6 rows or 5 rows Gwent would give. (I think people wrongly assume that 5 rows Gwent is just half as bad as 4 rows Gwent. When in fact you can still play your units on 3 rows as before, the game actually becomes better with a shared row. The complexity and depth gained from this would mean game would be less meta dependent, and more board focused, as any game should try to be. The fact that card sizes become bigger is just a fortunate by-product, which fits with CDPR's plans.)
Of course Gwent staying with 6 rows as now is a good option. But for me, after seeing the advantages a 5 rows Gwent gives, I would probably always prefer it (unless CDPR actually delieveres a great 6 rows Gwent, which is of course something very uncertain, just seeing where they took Gwent so far, and their serious consideration of 4 rows Gwent).
