Yes, i did. I played empire and chaos.
Pretty balanced, but only because we avoided spam. If you start spamming good units, all is lost, even with point system.
Even with points i've found out that artilleries are overcosted, big infantry units with some special rules are king, cavalry are ok-ish if buffed, monsters are a big hit or miss. I killed a goblin giant spider with a bunch of light infantry and 5 knights.
All in all, the points GW provides do almost nothing to really alter the game. It's a quick, straightforward game like it was before.
I honestly can't see a game doing well without having a pre-game chat with my opponent. Also, new rules for summoning are total utter shit. i suggest a nice houseruling for it!
I disagree on almost every count. I played extensively during Season of War (3-5 games a week) against all forms and flavors of armies. Spamming your "best" unit isn't even the most effective way to build a list. An army that stacks army synergies and buffs is far far more powerful, and that often requires a large breadth of different units via Warscroll Batalions and different hero choices.
Summoning is also quite fine and balanced, it's basically deep strike reserves from 40k that can replenish itself if the summoned unit dies, a great compromise to the grossly overpowered summoning in open play. I'm curious if you've ever actually legitimately tested a summoning based daemon army under matched play rules. It's very powerful if you can't take out those wizards.
The armies are also more or less pretty balanced between each other, we do random match pairings every week and no one knows their opponents list prior to the game.
Mind you this is all just my personal experiences, but that experience encompasses close to 50 matched play games and having a large group of local AoS players.