Having picked Tascam over Focusrite, I've had no previous experience with Mix Control. I just spent a few minutes going through their tutorial for Mix Control, the Whiskey Tango Foxtrot edition, and am at a loss for words.
 

I used to have a Focusrite Saffire Pro 40.  The Focusrite mix control was a beast back then.  They "complicated the ham sandwich".

Ran into this the other day with a TASCAM US 20x20.  I almost shot myself trying to get a single mix out of the headphones for the players.  Switching between pages to set levels and then outputs is a b ... bear.  Esp. when several players looking at you, waiting.  Their look was more pitiful than my dog before breakfast.  Glad you got that sussed out early, firebird.
 
I don't use the 20x20 enough to remember what I did the last time I used it for a bigger session.  But I think I'm finally starting to understand the relationships between the different pages and how they work as a single unit.  But why companies don't follow the standard "mixer" layout is beyond me.  I'll take familiarity over a small boost in flexibility any day, esp. under deadlines. 
 
However, I managed to get a direct mix going to the proper outs.  The soft mixer works from the hardware inputs, while the output settings let you choose between the mixer and direct computer outs, as far as I can tell.

My MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid's software control program "CueMix FX" isn't the best either.  I had problems when I first got the unit, and gave up and sent it back.  I exchanged it for a Presonus Studio 192 (same price) but the Presonus died the 2nd day I had it (power switch would not power unit off).  In the meantime, I ran into a person at the local Guitar Center that used MOTU and he offered to give me some instruction on it.  I went to his studio and spent a couple of hours going over CueMix FX.  I returned the defective Presonus Studio 192 and got another MOTU 896Mk3 Hybrid, since I now had enough information "to be dangerous".  I'm now happy with the MOTU as my primary unit.  The Tascam is a backup and as I mentioned may never be used and just collect dust, but I do know how to direct monitor.....

We once contracted to do a local festival, Collectively all us local bands had the makings of a monster PA system,, but we had didily squat for monitors, so we had the organizers rent a "real" monitor system.
Hmm, we all said as we opened the 3'x5.5' road case for the mixer... what the heck is that? 
Oh that's a monitor mixer! Or better known as a Matrix mixer. WTF, look at all those knobs!!
Anyhow it was very logical once you starred at it long enough and saw the beauty of the system. We even managed to patch in the rack full of outboard gear they sent along and make it all work. 
And got lots compliments on how great the monitors mix was coming through.
Not bad for a bunch of weekend warriors who had never seen anything bigger than a 24 Channel 4 buss.
 
So that said,, why can't these interface people stick to the standard formats used world wide.
I can understand people who have never worked with big consoles being confused, but making it so even those of us who have run almost every type mixer on the planet cannot figure it out?  Not only that, the software seems a little buggy too.