I was browsing a Russian aviation site and happened across this. I left it in context but if you read it it clearly shows that the russians (like the US in the PAC) actually suggested the frontal (HO) attack as the preferred strategy in some circumstances...
Separate from game play issues...the reality is that the frontal attack was a legitimate tactic in WW2.
During the trials, Institute specialists simulated aerial combat between a Bf 109F and a Russian Yak-1 (No. 0511), and worked out recommendations for Red Army Air Forces flight personnel. It turned out that the Soviet fighter had more chances to- win the greater the altitude. If the Me 109F was superior close to the ground and head-on attacks were recommended to our pilots then, at an altitude of 3000 meters, the chances were even and at 5000 meters, the Yak allegedly outperformed its adversary in speed and maneuverability. In other words, the suggestion was for pilots to draw German fighters to high altitudes.
Alas, these recommendations did not reflect the true state of affairs. From German materials and test results obtained in Britain, it turned out that the Bf 109F with a DB 60IN engine had a maximum speed of 597-600 km/h16 at an altitude of 6000 meters, rather than at the 552 km/h registered at the Air Forces Scientific Research Institute. It meant that the Messerschmitt surpassed all domestic fighters here, the series-produced MiG-3 included. But, it is quite clear why principal attention in the Soviet Union was paid to enemy fighter performance near the ground. It was just there where the main battles of the first phase of war took place and our aircraft designers were required urgently to improve the flight performance of domestic aircraft at low altitudes.
source
