From a player who has literally just made a GoG account to express this opinion, I hope a lengthy enough comment is something at least. At least here my opinion may actually be heard, as oppose to the numerous of other minor forums I usually prefer to frequent (since I mostly dislike the idea of contesting a person attached to post; I prefer to contest the opinions within a post itself, regardless of user). See this as a sign in its own right to the respect I already give regarding CDPR; since if this was ActiBlizz/ Ubisoft (etc) I know for a fact I would simply be screaming into the abyss as usual.
I am heavily disheartened at the prospect of 2 rows. For 2 major reasons-Design and (possible) Impact;
DESIGN
Gwent is by nature not a 2 row game. Gwent is a minigame from the Witcher 3; who had a very few rules and mechanics. The standalone has mostly built upon this idea in every way, with almost every single mechanic being preserved in the game bar Faction Abilities (a change I was not happy to see go in its own right a year ago yesterday, but alas). In total; Muster, Agility, Tight Bond (in a more balanced form of Reaver Hunters), Immunity (albeit only on Arachas Queen/Werewolves with no immunity to Scorch), Weather, Decoy, Spies, Scorch, Resilience - everything is here and present. Yet the idea of removing a row fundamentally contrasts this.
Imagine the Gwent standalone as a house contract (fitting, with the name of the Homecoming update). At the bare minimum, everybody wants a 3 story detached house, with a few bits of furniture guaranteed. One can add as many pieces of extra furniture, as many paintings, as many detailed intricacies, remodel the entire floor plan if you want- as long as it is a 3 story house with the given furniture. Making the house into a 2 storey bungalow may be abjectly better in every way shape and form; it may be cheaper, more efficient and allow for more costs to go into more beautiful furniture; but at the end of the day it is useless, since it is fundamentally not what the initial ask was. It would get rejected immediately by the asker. This is similar to how I view this prospect. I could not care less if 2 rows hypothetically made every card perfectly balanced, card advantage was a non-issue and there was a Michael Jackson card which did a perfectly tuned animated dance to the Witcher soundtrack; I could not care less, since the game presented would not be Gwent.
IMPACT
In one hand, there are excuses that this is to simplify the game, to make the Card Arts bigger and apparently to make the game more suitable for Mobile use. I am unsure which of these opinions are mirrored by the development team, but I will explain my grievances with each regardless.
First of all is simplification. I fail to understand how this is a valid idea, since surely a game should be as complex and intricate as possible first; then adapt that experience to newer players. Sure it may be harder for brand new players to understand ALL the mechanics initially; but that is what the lower competitive ranks and the sample decks are for. If someone is repelled by the idea of losing to their first Kambi due to the higher skill required of the deck, are they someone who would honestly love and play the game for longer than 2 days before shifting to the next flavour of the month? I would much prefer a situation where the skill floor is too high rather than the skill ceiling is too low (since the two are undeniably linked), since a low ceiling simply makes all investment gained from the floor effectively useless. The floor is what attracts players, the ceiling is what retains players (hence why an initially 'hard' game with large mechanic spreads such as CSGO or LoL have maintained relatively high playercounts through time periods many others in their respective genre have perished in-I appreciate not the sole reason for each; but a determining factor to say the least); so surely it would be in the best interest to focus on maintaining a core playerbase than keeping it in a constant flux of new players getting interested, then leaving later?
Regarding UI simplification, or Card Art; there have already been numerous examples of how to cut down space and a working example that Gwent can easily run on Smartphones (perhaps with minor layout differences, but in no way the need to remove a row). And irregardless of this, I have personally never saw the size of the cards as an issue. In the recent patch which added faction board themes, the size of all cards was reduced slightly; an lo and behold there was not nary a murmur from the community. Off the top of my head alone, making the hand cards popup to a given extent onto the board would address this nonissue, but alas perhaps there is a larger factor at play that I simply cannot see. At the end of the day, Gwent could be completely played without Card Arts (it wouldn't be nice, but theoretically), since it is mechanics and general gameplay alone that dictate Gwent; which leads onto...
Balancewise, what can be done with 2 can surely be done with 3. Talk of 'lost potential' is in itself lost on me, since 3 rows inherently has 2 rows in it already. Surely keeping the board to 3 rows would by nature have exponentially more potential. With another of my horribly loose examples, removing your arms might make you run faster and jump higher in the short term, but the potential you lose by streamlining too much means you cannot achieve what you already had, and even more past that further down the line.
In short, I hope CDPR listens to community outcry. Even if they were to make a poll themselves linked to the main game about it (should be relatively simple, treat it in the style of a faction challenge, replace the two faction artworks for a vote 'Yes' and a vote 'No' and count up which is the bigger faction); I'm sure the opinion would be echoed too (Greater than 90% agreement on anything is no small feat, even from the albeit notably smaller scale internal poll). Are the possible benefits really greater than the obvious community backlash? As previously stated; I think the costs would outweigh any and all benefits gained, but that is just me.
I appreciate that sometimes it is beneficial for developers to stick their foot in the ground and not budge on an issue. For example, if this hadn't been the case, Darkbeast Paarl/Loran Darkbeast from Bloodborne would not be one of the best fights in the entire series, Cuphead may have crumbled mid development (etcetera, etcetera); but it is equally important to know when to disregard a major idea which seems 'good'. If this change goes though, I fully intend to mill all of my cards come the Homecoming update (get enough scrap/dust back for multiple decks); and not buy a single thing else with it. Homecoming will be to a Home I don't recognise. I hope CDPR has enough time to have not invested too many resources already into this avenue should they wish to change this later.
But alas, these are just the cries of a single player in a base of thousands (still think putting it to official poll would be the best for everyone). If anybody wishes to ask questions or play devils advocate, feel free to comment whatever; I'll try to get back in a reasonable time period. I may come back later to add or agree with points already made by other users. But finally, thanks for taking 2-3 minutes out of your day to read this absolute block of text.