After reading the thread about AI setting's I gotta say after testing, WOW! what a difference.

Pity there is no global setting for AI. Maybe something else we can ask for?

Maybe, but the way they have it now, you can prevent the bombers from showing off & still have the fighter's set to a competitive skill. I really think this is the best way...too bad it took me a year to learn of this, but it was my own fault.

Ok, maybe global for plane type? must give this a go later.

For plane type is a good idea!...good luck getting it though

I don't understand your first sentence but OK.

I agree that other fixes should come sooner especially now that the main stumbling block has been removed. Luther's post about no more content for BOB can be taken the wrong way. The developer won't have time to build anymore BOB missions, campaigns, but everything else will change thru the life of the series. Its true we won't have much new content if we never download user made missions and campaigns, or buy the sequels, but 99% of us will download and buy the sequels if the quality is there. Later in the series the Channel Map will be like all the other maps in the series, where you load the map, but everything else is the latest edition of available Aircraft, AI, Commands, FM, DM, Weather etc, etc. Everything will also be improved by the community including the Channel Map.

Currently on my system I could build most missions flown during BOB without much problem regarding frame rates, even at the highest settings, With the patch I should be able to increase the amount of aircraft to simulate the very large German formations. I'm not sure how the radar and aircraft vectoring is simulated in the sim now, but would expect that feature to be improved in the future by the developer or atleast the tools made available for the community to flesh it out.

Good thing he didn't listen to our friend, Tree. We may never have had CoD.

I mean, i said before the shouldn't be a problem adding fixes with the performance patch, you said they prob couldn't because of coding.

The developer or BS said the patch would only be a performance patch. I said I understood why because they wouldn't want to introduce to many variables during fixing and testing the new code, but I hoped they would be able to introduce some fixes to the FM, AI, etc. I suppose since the patch took so long they were able to reduce the performance variables enough to add some AI etc fixes without over complicating the bug testing. There are no absolutes in this type of work and the developer can only guess how long it will take and what features will be ready to implement for any given patch.

Well, I am aware of several raids where the base height was ~20kft, with fighters stacked higher. Two examples, but there are others - single reconnaissance flights would be even higher ~ near 25kft for the lower performance types.

"Between London and Gravesend, AA fire drew their attention to an enemy force of some 150 aircraft flying generally north at 20,000 feet. The Germans were flying in waves of tight formations of Dorniers, Heinkels and Junkers 88s, with protecting fighters. Me 110s were behind the bombers and a formidable force of Me 109s behind them at about 24,000 feet. It had been arranged that the two Spitfire squadrons in the lead (composite 19/266 and 611) were to attack the fighter escort, while 74 Squadron aimed at the bombers. As 74 Squadron went for the force of Junkers 88s, they met fighters diving on them, but they gamely continued their policy of striking for the main formation... "
John Frayn Turner Battle of Britain Airlife 1998 p118

"No.249 Squadron

At 1622 hours on 7.9.40, 12 aircraft of 249 Squadron left North Weald to patrol first Maidstone and then Ashford at 15,000 feet to intercept Raid 15. They were then sent back to Ashford and ordered to intercept Raid 22.

About 30 He111s and Do17s were seen heading for London at 19,000 feet. escorted by at least 100 fighters, mostly Mel09s stepped up behind to 25,000 feet Enemy bombers were in three parallel lines of 3 vics in line astern. Our fighters attacked broadside on and one vic of three enemy bombers was seen to be left straggling behind, smoking, but it was impossible to say which of our pilots were responsible. Enemy formation turned aside from London went east, just south of North Weald aerodrome.

The original claims were only 2 Mel09s destroyed, but these have now been increased.
P/O Neil (Yellow 2) destroyed an Mel09 which broke up and turned over and went down smoking over Maidstone, although he did not see it crash.
Red 2 (P/O.Barclay) destroyed an Mel09 which emitted brilliant flames and black smoke from the cockpit. It dived steeply and pieces fell off, but he did not see It crash; this was south of Maidstone. The Mel09s were coloured yellow back to the cockpit.
Red 2 also damaged a Dol7 and an He111 He force-landed in a field, his a/c having been hit.
F/Lt Parnall finished off an He111, which two other unidentified Hurricanes had disabled, but apparently lost in the smoke. He saw it crash near Grain.
P/O Beazley (Green Section) finished off a Do2l5, which already had its starboard engine fired. It crashed near a main road south of Ongar.

Enemy casualties: 2 Mel09 destroyed
1 Do17 damaged
1 He111 damaged
1 He111 destroyed (shared with two u/i Hurricanes)
1 Do2l5 destroyed (shared with u/i friendly fighter or fighters)"

Of course, a penalty in accuracy would be seen from higher altitude attacks, and it might be necessary to lose some fraction of the maximum bomb-load to get this high (though for maximum range flight, this is already required, and a cruise-climb could be used throughout the approach segment to eke more height out of the limited performance as fuel was burnt off).
I concede that many raids were for various reasons made at low(er) altitudes, but 16kft was relatively low, and both sides' fighters would attempt to position some 2-4kft above the raid.