The real question is: Why is it arriving on console first?
for the starters to even the odds i think:
so only the second player could start looping, but after first player used whatever empowered spell etc he/she wanted
might not be a perfect idea but i think not bad?
also i prefer live pvp to be not-farmable at all, but open for fun and with limited rewards
also generally live pvp coud be limited to only 2 extra turns per a player round?
with this and some timer mechanisms i think that opens a whole new area of gow gameplay 
IMO the problem with “REAL PVP,” is the starting advantage is huge. Throw Mercy into the mix and it’s even bigger.
“Real PVP” would result the person starting first winning the majority of the time based on that alone.
Lets ignore:
I just don’t see how it’s viable
All games do not have to be all things, in fact, they are better when they do not even try.
In this case, Gems is an evolution of an RPG-like puzzle based game.
It’s rooted heavily in single player, care free, stop and think, collect em all, build resources type of experience.
Natural ‘NEXT BIG STEPS’ for this type of experience would be
Leveraging the world map for environmental effects by kingdom in battles (bonuses / penalties)
Per Kingdom defense teams
Additional arena, coliseum based mini-games which mess with core mechanics, like
Arena leagues
Different Arena like experiences, by kingdom
5 troop Arena
Different Maps instead of standard square
Seasonal effects across map in each kingdom, which could impact all games
example - in the way of unique seasonal ‘gems’ which count as ‘wilds’ or some kind of ‘negative effect’ when matched… and they randomly drop into board
‘Reserves’ based game type, where you have primary 4 troops, and 1-4 reserves which swap in as troops die
New Character - henchmen troop, which can train up similar to hero, and use hero weapons
Bring back old hero weapons, or update them and make them current and available again
Kingdom boss battles that can be done weekly one time, which are affected by day / night games, seasonal and kingdom effects, allow you to take your 4 troops - and 1-4 reserve troops which auto cycle in, where you attempt to defeat a super boss with unique board and in game affects containing new unique moves, gem drops specific to that boss, some might have different board types… turns might be force timed… or game might have to be won in certain amount of turns before consequences or death occurs, and you might even have bonus / weakness for taking mismatching troops to elements the boss wields… etc.
PVP is the LAST thing this game ever needs, RPG and PvE elements, very approachable and at the single player’s pace - leveraging the lore with beautiful cliche fictional fantasy art are what put this game on the map… and it should build on that formula for continued success.
PvP can be left to the try-hards in other games. Nobody needs to ‘prove’ anything here… call of duty, MOBAs, halo and the alike are there if you need that fix. Destiny and the Division are two very recent games where you see PvP try hard interest basically destroy what would otherwise be an outstanding fiction for PvE based fiction. Diablo III is an example of a treasure romp, click fest where PvP was tried and died in favor of the core build, collect and loot plunder.
In the end, a game cannot be all things to all people. Some player types, just are not going to be attracted to a game… and that is quite alright, and has proven to be a very successful business plan. I hope @Sirrian stays true to what made his games great and builds on that success.
Excellent post. 
you forgot world bosses and raids!