Thanks for the quick reply, and I can understand that aspect as I had no idea that so many were placed by default from lack of bid. The only issue I have is that you're basically saying the entire system is flawed

. I was wondering how it was even possible for some guilds to raise enough funds to place a high bid every week. I'm not sure how the pairing works but I'd suggest basing it on comparable guild funds raised, as this is still almost a direct correlation to the more active and full guilds. Obviously it's complicated, and I can still see issues with it this way, but you could also base default placement loosely on total amount of guild funds donated in the previous week. This would make pairing even more likely to be comparable, as a high member guild will always donate more funds than one without members. You would almost need some sort of penalty though for not placing a bid, which as you described would be almost impossible to implement in the current bidding system, or else not placing a bid would still be abused.
You could always just scrap the bidding process altogether, and use some type of RNG altered by the factors I suggested above. since it seems that most of the guilds are not bidding anyways, and the ones that do get stuck facing one's that don't quite often according to your post. This would also be incentive to have larger guilds, and more funds donated. Obviously no perfect answer, but something NEEDS to change, because the only "war" half the time is with your own guild members to get a single fight in.....