Performance Counts.
Ie, Speed and climb ability. Over everything else.
There is a reason that the Sopwith Camel was not used by the RAF in WW2 (it was slow).
There is a reason the Me262 was developed by the LW (it was fast). Could the Me 262 turn with any allied fighter? nope.
"Fighting style"? please. Well, in a 1 v 1 AH duel maybe (with duelling rules ect) , but not in real life.
Slow planes die. Period.
Btw the vast majority of the aces attacked enemy ac that never saw them coming, at high speed. Thats how it was done. Usually in a single pass. That is common for almost all the aces of ww2 regardless of the ac they flew. They didnt stay alive by prolonged dogfights vs enemy fighters that knew they were there.
Why was the Spitfire a good fighter in 1940? Speed and climb. That it was used like some super aerobatics plane is a total myth. It was not.
Why was the 109E a good fighter in 1940? Speed and climb.
The HurricaneI? well it was slower and did not climb as fast as the 109, and that is the reason it was considered less effective than either of the above. It coud out turn a 109, true, but overall, it wasnt a match because of performance lag.
Why was the Zero a good fighter in 1941-2 in the Pacific? Speed and climb mainly, and its better turning circle helped vs ac of similar performance, but it could out climb the P-40B and F4F, and thats why it did well. It was hampered by not being faster however, which is why it relied on its turning circle when it had to. Ultimately, the Zero was a failure, bacause of its poor performance vs later allied types.
The ability to climb above your opponent (bomber formations or fighters) await an opportunity, and make a fatal attack at the right moment, then use your performance to escape retaliation.
Large events in AH reflect this, ala the TODs, Snaphsots ect, thats the best place to see it work. Now, not everybody adheres to proper tactics mind you...just one more turn and I will get that con...just one more...

Regards.