I've only played a little bit of AOS myself but I do think that the game is more complex than it seemed initially. I'm willing to give it a try and see how it goes over time. You never know - it might surprise us.
Right on both accounts. Sadly I think you could easily have made "lets bring what we want" in 8th, where as "lets have Win-game" in age of sigmar is far harder to accomplish.
I think that the game has more tactical depth than we have given it credit for. But I haven't played enough games yet to really be sure. It seems to me that the Seraphon in particular can still use unit synergies to shift the odds in our favour. Sure we have no flanking or outright stopping ranged troops by engaging in melee, no feigned flight etc. But the choice of which melee will be completed first, ganging up on enemy units and fighting the correct enemy unit with the correct counter of yours are all still present. Now hopefully I'm not deluding myself and a few more games will confirm that there is still some tactical depth. Even if it's less obvious or forms a smaller part of the game. One plus I found for myself was that my best friend and I had become too competitive. We had become too invested in winning and less in enjoying the game and each other's company. AOS due to it's less serious nature has helped us to take a mental step back from that hyper competitive edge and just enjoy the actual game again.
You don't play just to win, but winning is still the point of any game. If winning is pointless, so is the game.