The integrity of OS in a game with parties

I believe that OS is currently a severely flawed balancing system with it's current implementation for two primary reasons:

1.) Currently there is zero downside for playing in parties. It is objective fact that given equal OS, on average, a group of players in a discord call running 3+ man parties in big team battles skews the matchmaking with zero current downside. I understand that people want to play with their friends on same team but in it's current state, I believe it is objectively unfair that parties are given the same autobalance weight as unpartied players in the balance algorithm and by an order of magnitude the most slanted games in either direction are usually caused by parties or one team having a new player which leads into part two. I would not be surprised that a player who regularly plays exclusively in parties has a naturally inflated OS again causing balance problems when they're playing without the crutch of voice calls and instant information transmission. Sometimes this is as simple as being able to coordinate units and pushes with higher precision and sometimes it's being able to call and respond to leaks faster. Either way, there are objective advantages and at best you can argue how much of an advantage not if there is one. Just to compound on the above, there is zero UI clarification in the lobby that a group of players is in a party so you can't even consistently dodge lobbies with them. At absolute minimum lobbies should be shown in lobbies.

2.) New players are started drastically higher OS than they could ever hope to play at on average which in itself isn't a huge deal but in nearly every other ladder/rated game in existence early uncertainty means you move massive margins with each loss/win. Currently this just isn't the case. It's not uncommon to see 2 chev players who are struggling to do functionally anything still at 15+ OS after a dozen or more games which fucks a variety of things from pick orders to balancing up. The current MM system does internally rate new players drastically lower than their displayed skill but not low enough to not result in extremely predetermined games. If I hop on chess.com and start at say 1200, the equivalent of a well over 50% percentile player and lose 5 games in a row, I'm going to be knocked down by often upwards of 100+ elo per loss. In BAR if I make a new account and lose 5 games as a new player my OS is like 15, still higher skill than the average player (which is kept artificially high by new accounts).

That's all I really have to say, this isn't a saltpost about losting at eventually OS will balance out to be close enough to where players should be but I'm personally getting pretty sick of extremely unfun games caused by poor balancing due to parties and the balance algorithm overvaluing new players. Cheers.