Once again we are mismatched in war again. Opponent has 12 players we have 11 giving them 6 extra flags.
War score is matched up correctly, but we are losing wars over and over due to this stupidity.
It doesn’t matter what your justification is for this because you are wrong and it has now become a joke. Wars are just practice now and we no longer enjoy this part of the game.
Fix it, or keep being the joke.
Users of the forum are players of E&P just like you. I don’t know the odds of this happening to you… again. 
Commiserations. 
Contact SG directly, try this link…
Would you rather they just forced you to sit out this war because there is no suitable alliance to match you with that has the same number?
I believe there are also existing threads about this. No need to open yet another that will only get merged.
You are quite mistaken in your understanding, which doesn’t surprise me at all. We are defenders of reason and logic, not the game. Almost everything you say defies logic which is why you get people coming back at you with logic - which you manage to dodge much like Neo dodging bullets in the Matrix. Its actually kind of fascinating to watch.
Personally I have no real opinion on war matchmaking because I have never been on the wrong side of it. I am sure matchmaking issues exist, but I am also sure that it is an extremely difficult algorithm to get right, particuarly with smaller alliances
There’s a pre-existing thread which explains in detail how matchmaking is conducted (this one: Alliance Wars Matchmaking (Discussion & Developer Response) MASTER) plus info is outlined on the Support Articles.
A common misconception is that Even Numbers is the prime directive of matchmaking. It actually isn’t.
Matchmaking prioritises the WAR SCORE first and foremost for alliances with +/- 2 members.
The WAR SCORE is a mathematical function of:
What this all means is that there can be matchups between different number of participating members. How it works is that the two alliances still have a similar Alliance War Score, but in order for Alliance A to have the same war score as Alliance B (who have +1 member), they need to be stronger in the other aspects of the calculation; be it more depth, better top 5 heroes or better past history performance. Think of it like an equation:
A1 + B1 + C1 + D1 = A2 + B2 + C2 + D2
In order for the equation to balance, if A1 goes up, some of the other factors (B2,C2,D2) need to go up 
Anyways, I’m not justifying / saying “working as intended” or anything, just explaining how the matchup CAN occur.
It’s possible that numerical (perceived) mismatches in numbers are occurring more often now that it uses the individuals history not the alliances history as there are now more alliances in the brackets these days…
I don’t know personally as I’m not QA or even staff.
This message is just to correct the misinformation being accidentally spread.
Now with the explanation about how the matchmaking works, I will reiterate this part:
I will ask staff and ask if there has been an increase in this kind of match-up recently. There does seem to have been more reports on the forum of it, but whether it’s a universal increase or just more reports idk. But I’ll ask
Thanks, Guv. 
I would really like to know whether this has changed lately or it just feels this way…
Our small and chilled alliance consists of only six to eight players and during the last half year we had at least six occasions were our opponent had one player more. Right now, for the second time in a row (!), we are facing an opponent with seven members while we are only six players. Might be our fourth defeat in a row. 
Not to mention that especially for small alliances the six flags difference is a major drawback and on top the opponent receives more points per defeated player?! 
By the way, we NEVER had a player more on our side. It might be just very bad luck, but i mean, seriously??? 
I personally already decided to stop participating in wars after the next war chest. I always liked this feature but with the negligible war chest loot and the new war rules its no longer worth the time invested for me. 
Hey SG what the heck is going on here?!? Why does the team we (The Ravens Nest) are playing in this war (11/25/2020) have one more team than we do?!? It’s hard enough winning a war without your enemy having 6 more flags that you do!!! Whats up with that?
It can and does happen in war matchmaking, but seen quite a few more posts on this recently.
It’s based on your roster hero strength
We were discussing this in our alliance today. We think that’s happening due to the new matchmaking algorithm they implemented.
We are also marched against an alliance with 1 more team than us (19x18). Was the opposite last war, we had 1 more team than them for the first time.
Well that make no sense, and a pretty sad answer to be honest. How can team have more players un war ,because of a roster, do the team with less player have extra flags?, please find a better answer that the 1 you just gave.
Unfortunately that can happen. Here is an existing thread with similar issue:
Please find a better way of saying thanks to someone who is trying to help you
Hello,
I have been playing wars alone in inactive alliances for some time. I joined the war in another alliance. After the matchmaking phase, I saw that a member of this alliance has been inactive for 60 days. He had an empty team. Which is normal as I am not logging into the game yet. Nevertheless, a strange thing happened when the war started. Only me and 2 opponents are in the war. In my opinion, there should be 2 members of the opposing team in the war, and me and an inactive member of the team in which I am playing the war. Because this leads to a situation where it’s 2: 1 in the war. Admittedly, the opposing team will have twice as many attacks (12). The question is, is this a bug or not?
In my opinion, this inactive member of the team should also be on the battlefield. And then we have a situation of 2: 2 on the battlefield and 12:12 in attacks in the war. And the fact that inactive will not use its 6 potential attacks is my problem.
Or it shouldn’t be an alliance with 2 members and with 1 member. Then it is fair because we have 1: 1 on the battlefield and 6: 6 in attacks in the war.
Of course, I submitted the topic to the Bug Bounty program according to the link https://www.smallgiantgames.com/white-hats. Neither from BugCrowd nor from Small Giant I received an answer whether the error was detected or not, and whether it is a normal selection of opponents in the war. It is interesting that the next war, after reporting this error, was chosen by 1 opponent in the war. There were 6-6 in attacks and the non-active alliance member did not show up on the battlefield.
I am asking for your suggestions whether this is a bug or not. Has anything similar happened to you?
Best regards,
Johnny Bravo
This isn’t a bug, it’s part of matchmaking which can’t always find identical teams.
Matchmaking continues to be imperfect and it certainly works less well for smaller alliances.
Wow I’ve been playing 2 1/2 years, never seen this
This is not a solution, this is an explanation.
The solution is for SGG to actually spend some effort and balance it.
We also encountered the first War team size mismatch I have ever seen in my 26 months of play in reasonably sized alliances.
I found a very old post saying that “benches are taken into account in this situation”. That is a complete load of male bovine feces.
Their team: 21 players, average defense 4440.
Our team: 20 players, average defense 4286.
Since we can’t see benches, I am including that their average player level was 4 higher than ours. This is at least a good guesstimate of bench size. Above level 60, it takes roughly a month to level. That’s 4 extra months of play on average for each their players.
Here’s another major issue with mismatch teams: The points. Each equivalent (hit points) team on our side is worth 6-7 more points to them. So not only do they get 6 more flags, but defeating an equivalent team gives them a handful more points. If anything, the points should be skewed in the opposite direction.
Horrible design. The Alliance that is fighting down a team should be given something to compensate. Otherwise it’s a slaughter, the most lopsided loss I have ever seen and our team scored about average.
I don’t recall the exact number, but once a player misses a number of war battles with no participation they are automatically Opted Out of wars. Have seen this happen. I believe it’s 2 or 3.
