With some many different support types flooding the gemboard in v2.1, the gemboard will feel very cramp now.
How about using a new bigger gemboard (9x9 or 11x11) to replace the current one (7x7)?
I like how in the original puzzlequest games, boss battles are conducted on a bigger gemboard compared to scrub battles. PvE can use the same concept too, if introducing a bigger gemboard to PvP events is too radical an idea.
But how about the touch resolution of the smart devises? Is it good enough to prevent unintentionally combining of gems?
So, it should have a focus function as well, to make it easier to combine the right gems.
I like the idea, though. But I fear the developers are overburdened with this task.
And, sorry, but I have to point out that this is the wrong part of the forum… 
@AngelForge the suggesting and feedback section is rather desolate compared to general.
@THEMAGICkMAN
I know… That is why people decide to post here and I understand that.
But if we all start to post suggestion and feedback in the right section and start visiting that poor section, things will change.
Also, I’d like to use this chance to use a quote from “The Big Lebowski” movie:
“This is not ‘Nam. This is bowling. There are rules.” — Walter Sobchak
(But please don’t take me too serious on that, have I been caught breaking rules as well)
Back to the topic:
If that would really happen, some mechanics for Origins and SOI (More than 8 gems and delirium) would also have to be revised. But that is probably a small stepping stone, compared to the programming of the board itself?
Here’s a crazy idea… Puzzle Quest 1 & 2 had subgames played on different boards. Wouldn’t it be cool if some of the ultrarare chase Masterpiece cards activated subgames?
Who can forget the the great games shahrazad created?
Let’s also bring some ante mode!
I know ante only from paying poker - how would it work?
Alright, alright, there’s no need to be sarcastic!
Ante was in the original Mtg rules. At the start of each game, players remove the top card of their decks and use it as an ante. Winner gets to keep both cards.
So the more expensive (strong) your deck was, the more you risked. There were even cards that interfere with the ante. It was an awesome concept ruined by the fact that everyone was a sore loser.
Also it fell foul of gambling laws in some countries, which I believe was the main reason it was nixed.
Oh, now I remember! An Ante event where you could use your dupes to win other dupes sound funny, by the way.
Must really have been a pain when your ante was a rare, and the other player pulled a mana card..
It’s fun because you might not be ante-ing a dupe, but your only copy of Olivia!
Not without real pvp though.
No one wants the AI to be losing their card collection for them while they are asleep. 
I do recognize this is more of a sarcastic suggestion given the game’s current setup, though. But a fell chill just ran through me to the core.
That’s why @ohboy mentioned “real pvp”
During sleep? Think about loosing only copy of Olivia loaded and ready to cast during a match;)
But back to the topic - bigger gemboard - I’m against. Already lost some fights due to wrong swing. And as we have energy, support, activated, devoid gems already - it only make more chaos.
So back to the original point… Not only would this suggestion impact Origins spell mastery cards and Innistrad delirium cards, but it would also make energize/overload much more difficult. If you only energize one or two gems on a much larger field, the chances of triggering an overload are much lower, so that mechanic would have to be revisited as well.
There’s too much that’s already been designed for the field size the way it is that I don’t think that it’s worth the resources to rebalance that many cards for it when what we have now is sufficient. The only things popping out a large number of supports are effects with fabricate since clue tokens never live on the board past two turns. The trials in Amonkhet might add more supports to the field, but I don’t see them choking the field out entirely.