el cid again
The anti-aircraft bomb concept was one of those that was so ineffective the best "simulation" might be to ignore it!
That said, they probably did have occasional success. Imagine, trying to hit with an unguided ballistic bomb,
dropped from an aircraft moving in three dimensions, another aircraft also moving in three dimensions! Not quite
the same thing as aiming a machine gun! And even THAT was only effective at remarkably short ranges.
I sort of grew up with aiming weapons from airplanes as part of the atmosphere. My mother was one of the first
enlisted women in US Army service - early in 1942 (so early they didn't even have underwear for women - something
which changed very quickly!). Trained as a photographer, and taught to interpret intelligence photos, she then spent
the war with gun aiming and bomb aiming cameras, training bomber crews (which is how she met my father). For some
reason, she taught me how to make film, and develop it, from kitchen and bathroom chemicals (a wartime concept),
and how to make a camera from a shoebox with a "pinhole" for a lens! And lots about aiming guns and bomb sights -
the latter being unbelievably compicated (and not as effective as their reputation would have you believe).
If I were to model anti-aircraft bombs - and I have no such plan at this time - I would use AA rockets - and your idea of
an accuracy of 1 - and a very short range slightly better than a machine gun. [Game code ideas about "range" of AA
weapons are very statistical - MG with a range of 1 will sometimes hit at a range of 3 or 4!] AA bombs were intended to
be dropped on bomber formations (which could not maneuver much and were somewhat predictable) from above -
yielding multiple potential targets. So the "range" would be perhaps in the 5 - 10 range - you had to drop ahead of the
formation so they might meet it when they reached its altitude.