I played a game recently and I attacked a territory at the same time as another player it was crucial to outcome of game. I thought that as I had bigger army it was a given i would take it but the game handed it to opponent and consequently the win. It was first order in sequence so I don't know why opponent got it and not me. Makes games pointless when outcome is decided on a stroke of luck.

Two possibilities

(a) you failed to take it;
(b) your captured it, then it was taken off you be other player.

You cannot actually attack at the same time, only on the same turn. One player will always attack before the other. Sounds to me like you may have captured it if you did not attack it as your first move, or attacked with more.

There will always be an element of luck in the game, but agree that games with too much luck are pointless. For this reason, I tend avoid random distrubution games with too few starting spots.

1. It sounds like you're using "skip to end." Try using the "Watch Turn" button and you'll get a better understand of how attacks work - attacks don't happen at the same time.

2. Include the [link to the game](http://wiki.warlight.net/index.php/Link_to_Game) in your forum post. Then we could look at the game and give you a better answer of what happened.

3. You mention that your order was first. It depends on the size of the neutral, but having your attack happen first could actually be worse, since it means that you lost armies fighting the neutral whereas your opponent spent all of his armies fighting you and none of his armies fighting the neutral.

I have a third possibility.. which is more likely later in the game when you are dealing with *larger* armies..

(c) he captured it, and you were unable to take it off of him.

using strategic luck, if you attack with 12, and he attacks with 9.. he attacks first, loses one, so he now has 8 defending, 12 attack and deal 7.2, slight bit of bad luck turns it into 7, leaves it uncaptured by the bigger force, despite the bigger force being almost 50% larger then the smaller offense..
this is one of many reasons why order priority cards are soo valuable.

The best answer to this question is but one word: luck. I once had troops which was equal to two more than my opponent attack one of his territories and failed to take it (obviously, at higher amount of forces), then later on in the turn that territory attacked me back and simply captured it without losing a whole lot. 75% luck is evil, and it destroys a lot of games. You can't simply expect "a larger army" to win against a smaller one with so many other factors involved.

(Yes, I understand this was somewhat answered, I merely wanted to include my example.)

Darkruler, not really luck.. luck did have a benefit in it, but attacking first, with only a slight advantage, is a failing strategy..

42 v 40

41 attacks, deals 24.6, and losses 28

makes it now 14 v 16
15 attacks, and deals 9, then losses 9.8

end the conflict with 5v7 from 42v40, with very near 0% luck..
it would only take a slight luck interferance, conceivable even at 16% luck, to change this conflict to an attacker complete defeat

First of all, one of the luck factors is that my attack came before his. There were no order delay cards, and all my other moves were before that one. Plus, naturally, he put all his income there. It was early on in the game, so nowhere else to go. I know the drill.

The total amount of armies was a lot less, it may have been somewhere around ten. I also meant that my attacking forces were two more than his defending forces. I simply don't remember all details, but he kept around five of his armies and all of mine were defeated. It was more meant as an anecdote than giving a real probability.

there is no luck in turn order. If you move first in turn X, you will move second in turn Y

Sewer, I don't think that is the case. In most games (indeed, the default settings), turn order is random. In some cases, such as the Season II ladder, the turn order is fixed, with player A going first, then player B next turn.

delaying is a tactic... unless he got first go that turn, and managed to just barely go after you, then he merely out-delayed you... circumstances may have been so that you had no chance, but doesn't change the fact..

useless helpful fact..
if you expect someone to do a late attack, and want to out-delay them, while still doing an expectant counter-attack.. instead of piling -all- armies into defense.. put 1's around behind that defense to move into the defended territory first, *-if possible*-.. the attack will kill the already moved troops first, so your counter-attack will only be weakened if he held back his attack.. oftencase this is a suicide attack anyways..

@ John, hm i just checked again and you are right. my bad.

Sewerrat, even if it was the case, I already put all possible moves before that one. It's standard procedure. There were no armies to move, or anything to attack. It was on the scrabble map, by the way.

Perrin, I wanted to use all of my troops on that attack, I believe I didn't even have a bonus yet, so 5 income. I'm not trying to be aggressive in defending my position, but I was merely placing an anecdote knowing that I've done what I could. I understand you try to see other possibilities, though. Nevertheless, I think this is better discussed in the thread about unlikely outcomes. My analogy here was merely to show that the OP just had bad luck.