We do have terrain warscrolls. These do very little to actually impact most of the battles (and are largely ignored by most people I know).
I'm talking about things like area terrain blocking line of sight, hills that provide a benefit to holding them, difficult terrain that can slow an army (right now the game moves on fast forward and while I see how that can be appealing, I really miss when holding a ford or bridge or whatever meant something) - -things like rivers and lakes slowing you down.
They don't even need to be super in depth. Hills granting +1 to hit if you are on the high ground, not being able to run through difficult terrain and slowing charges, and area terrain blocking line of sight would with just those three things make for more interesting battles to me than what we currently have.
I know I'm not alone in that thought either because this is asked for often in forums and my own group which is normally VERY adverse to houserules likes my campaign terrain rules because it makes battlefield management more of a thing than it is now. They are also really easy and don't require having to place tokens down to remember what they do (the problem with the random mysterious terrain is one day the hill may be deadly terrain the next game it may be arcane and the next game it may be super spooky... and because terrain changes its rules all the time like this people largely tend to ignore them)
AOS and 40k are to my knoweldge the only "wargame" today that makes the table relatively unimportant. I know there is the argument that the terrain scrolls have rules and that should be enough but a lot of those are situational, cause fights because a lot of them only benefit one side (like the mausoleum) and there are no decent random tables to generate a table off of like there was pretty much forever.