6 consecutive losses against arranged teams

I would not put Valve and Relic at the same level of awareness of what's good or not for their playerbase. Its a bit offending for valve or at least the team inside valve managing dota2 and all the work they are doing to make their game enjoyable.

At least Valve tries on regular base to overcome those situations and patch their game asap when there is something wrong or not meeting their quality requirements, unlike Relic.

Now I join you on the segmentation issue. coh2 has a primary segmentation dota2 hasn't. Factions. And from what I see many teams and random are more likely interested in playing Axis than allied. And since it took Relic around 6 months bring a first change into the 1st root cause of this situation, balance issues more evident in large tramway, we're not going to see any improvement anytime soon.

But... but... the leaderboard... new faction... UGC...

Nah, it's called having common sense. People like having balanced matches; they also don't like to wait. Even matches and short queue times are opposite ends of a spectrum that must be balanced by the developer. Ultimately, as a developer you have to choose between sacrificing better balance for shorter wait times, or sacrificing shorter wait times for better balance, because the ideal short wait times with perfectly balanced matches is almost impossible to attain, especially for a tiny game like CoH2.

Valve is lucky because Dota has so many players that the vast majority of matches can be statistically balanced. Even then, whenever they've been forced to, they've erred on the side of sacrificing balance in favour of maintaining their ideal queue times (which seems to be around 2:30). Relic doesn't have the luxury of a large player base to draw from, so they have tougher decisions to make. Still, their decision to favour shorter queue times over more balanced matches is in line with the practices of one of the largest multiplayer developers today.

If the developers of one of the most popular multiplayer games today are actively taking steps to prevent queue times from growing an unreasonable amount, it's perfectly logical for Relic to do the same.

I don't see Relic doing the same, I see Relic doing nothing, in accordance with their NDA policy and 6 months / work schedule plan to analyze data and bring minor changes in the balance.
As I say it is disrespectful for Valve to be compared with Relic in term of reactivity and quality.

What I see is
1- Relic does the strict minimum to develop features to improve the game experience.
2- Players complain that is not enough or broken.
3- Relic argues they are too busy (and excited) but will do their best to improve it but never do it.

Right First Time concept is probably unknown at Relic headquarter. But this is the only way to save time and money and being the strongest and important KPI in term of impact on customer satisfaction since its the first one anytime a customer evaluates.

Last point about Valve being lucky of having so many players... Here again, that nothing to do with Luck. Luck is part of everything and the only way to improve you luck rate is to work better and deliver better.
Indeed Relic would have been really lucky to have the same playerbase than Valve with their actual community management policy.

Relic's already done the same by combining random and AT queues. The principle of that decision is the same as the principle of Valve's decision to remove solo queue: less fragmentation leads to shorter wait times at the expense of sometimes matching arranged teams with randoms. The obvious conclusion we can draw from this is that Valve feels sacrificing some match balance in order to reduce queue times is better for the overall health of the game, and that Relic agrees. I'd say they're in a better position to make that judgment than anyone here.

Video game world is more competitive now, nobody wants to wait 20+ minute to get a single game.

If you want to reduce the chance of getting completely one sided matches, just reset the search every 1-2 mins. GL finding a game.

I'll play team games with you, if you pay me.