Is there anymore top engine games won by tactics!?

[Jouni]

Or alternative lost by missed tactics. Seems to be almost nonexistent when 3000+ engines play.

[Eelco de Groot]

Counterargument: when was the last time someone posted a computer game won with superior positional play (some sort of planning for instance)? Excepting the Aleph Null games. Of the remainder there is winning by speculative play but the opponent has to help a bit, for which you probably have to play some form of Tal, OpenTal, from Chris W. New Neural Tal (NNTal) , NeanderTal etc. Not really Stockfish. The rest, if you exclude all correct draws, and incorrect draws is all the games won by not seeing tactics, probably by both computers, until one of the two suddenly sees it across the horizon or otherwise stumbles upon it.

[Vinvin]

Or alternative lost by missed tactics. Seems to be almost nonexistent when 3000+ engines play.

"tactics" is blurry concept.
I'd say all games are decided by tactics

[Vizvezdenec]

for example http://chess.my2dollars.ca/archive.html ... html&gn=87
SF tactically won an exchange and converted it.
Actually since YLCET features SALC there are a lot of games that are decided in some unorthodox tactics.

[Vizvezdenec]

Or this one...
http://chess.my2dollars.ca/archive.html ... html&gn=33
f4!
Rxf6!!

[Gary Internet]

http://tcec.chessdom.com/archive.php?se=11&di=P&ga=181

Look at this Final FEN from Chiron vs Fire in TCEC Season 11.

Fire's knight forks Chiron's King and Queen. That was where the game ended but you can easily see how FIre would go on to win convincingly.

This is a really obvious example of a basic tactic.

There are probably many more out there that are far less obvious, where the threat of a tactic forces the opponent to defend in a way that weakens their position and then they are slowly ground down.

It might not be Mikhail Tal style sacrifices all over the board, but the tactics, or threats of them will be there somewhere.