Too lazy to check: what thrusters were used for the rough, and what for the fine?
1) Images and sample aalysis data from the rover were the culmination of the scientific objectives. Probably not going to happen. So was the whole project a loss? ABSOLUTELY NOT.
2) This was -what? second flight of the GSLV-3? In most Space Agencies this would have been a trial flight with dummy payload. If the launch survived, 90% success. Injection to GTO, 110%.
3) In addition, they went ahead with a massively complex lunar mission. Entering lunar orbit: check.
4) Separation of lander module from orbiter: check
5) Lander managed to aim correctly for landing point: check
6) Successful flight at like 100 miles above lunar surface: check (huge gravity fluctuation issues IIRC; whatever predictive algorithm and compensator they had, worked perfectly! )
7) "Coarse" braking: successful first attempt!!! (check!!)
Telemetry worked up to end of coarse braking, 2.1 km from landing point, very low altitude. CHECK!!
9) Getting PM in and out of Mission Control for 2AM event: CHECK!
10) Slapping down and de-briefing NDTV: CHECK!
ISRO are being too hard on themselves. They just completed the equivalent of 3 major missions with perfect success.
Minor issue identified with the motor for the lander. who cares about images from a hot abrasive airless desert that makes KSA look like a paradise anyway? I already posted he realities about the two "Major Aims" of going to the lunar south pole: ice molecules and He-3 atoms. (yawn!!)