there's no such thing as a skill ceiling, you're always learning, always improving.
the random factor is one of the biggest bullshit reasons for hating on the game, if the game was so uncontrollably random then tournament seeds that would be totally inaccurate, in fact they were spot on in SNF season 4 and the previous tournaments that I've worked on.
OK. There certainly is such a thing as a skill ceiling, it's when further attention to micro/attention/strategy begins to yield fewer and fewer returns on investment. Inverse, for example, spams a lot of clicks and moves very fast whenever I watch his stream, and it certainly helps him. But I can watch other players, just as good if not better, and they move slower and don't appear to suffer much. CoH does not reward lighting fast reflexes like CS and such games, nor just it reward perfection in builds like SC2 does. It's still a great game, but it has a very real skill ceiling, and I think every good player today would acknowledge that. Of course you always can get better and improve, but slightly and slowly once you get to tournament level CoH.
Crits, artillery, grenade placement, squad wipes on retreat, tank criticals, people diving out of cover, counter-snipes, unit accuracy and all sorts of other things are random and, by nature, harmful to skill based competition. Games have been lost purely based on artillery missing, or on lucky retreat paths, or on missed CS's. I love some of them as a spectator, but as a player, it really does matter I think. You have a point with seeds, but I think that's more down to the longevity of the game and the experience of the organizers by now. Is luck everything in CoH? No. Is is present, more so than in most other "competitive" RTS's? Yes.
Edit: I most certainly am not hating on CoH, also. I've been playing for like 4 years, and plan on continuing to play it. I just recognize the flaws it has.