Definitely there should be repercussions for certain decisions, like storming a fort FTGJ (apart from losing morale at times, which is hardly an impediment) or taking a round-out route in the swamps in order to beat up another monster and loot corpses. I kinda get why CDPR have done otherwise, but it feels more fairytale-like than it should be. Also, the "human" resource (don't know how it is called in the English version, I played all Russian, voices aside) seems to be inexhaustible, unless maybe you constantly try out new decks and max all your cards up to 5. I understand why they chose this design over others, but then again, it is a bit unrealistic, given that you lead a relatively small band of rebels and insurgents and not an army. I think that in this instance the game should make a player to be more picky and strategic about their choices. I think maybe the whole morale concept should be reworked and maybe transformed into a scale of some sort so that your decisions would have a more lasting effect and you'd have to modify your modus operandi accordingly, just like any ruler or leader, in that regard, must do to stay afloat. When you send out a reconnaissance command, maybe it would be best if sometimes they didn't return due to various scripted reasons (like being killed by a Squirrel arrow or something) and you'd lose a couple of recruites. And finally, while some puzzles are very enjoyable, some (especially in endgame) make an impression of having been put together in a great rush to fill space no matter the quality.
However, despite all of my criticism, this is still a great and enticing game that made me consider starting to play Gwent standalone for a change, which, after all, was the chief reason it was designed in the first place.
