There is one passing comment in Billows 'Antigonos the One Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic State'

He mentions how in the invasion of Egypt after he has been crowned King in 306. He took 80,000 infantry and 4,000 cavalry. He did this as not to make the same mistake Perdikkas did in 320 BCE. However Billows mentions that this number was such a larger force that it was overwhelming difficult to keep order and control within the camp.

Now if we look at why larger armies failed in battle we see that a lot of the time it is due to a group of soldiers panicking and fleeing turning the battlefield into a rout and chaos. If we use Antigonos' Invasion as an example is due to the lack order that can be instilled over such a large force.

There are also other factors at play too. Technology, the troops fighting, clever tactics. Again using Antigonos (been doing a lot of work on him) in a battle against Eumenes he used the dust from the elephants on the battlefield to hide his cavalry and allow it to flank the baggage train. In a later battle where his opponent had use of elite Silver Shield Macedonians he captured their families in a raid and threatened their lives unless surrender took place.

There are also plenty of battles where equal sides won, or the larger sides won. But there are not always as interesting to the writer and reader. Again an example here would be the campaigns of Antigonos in Asia minor after Alexander left him there. He had a much superior force to those he was engaged with. We have evidence, just not as much, however the tales of Alexander's combat at Issus where he overcame great odds we are blessed with many sources