Head on attacks were adopted by some Luftwaffe units because of the bombers defensive , it had nothing to do with escort fighters.
This method of minimised two factors, the number of guns the formation could bring to bear on the attacker(s) and the time of exposure to those weapons. Both these work in favour of the attacker. It also minimised the time that the attacker could line up and engage his target. This made it a difficult attack to carry out successfully particularly for less experienced pilots. This worked in favour of the bombers.
Having a computing sight of the type used in WW2 does not guarantee hits on the target. It had to be used correctly, tracking the target smoothly for long enough for the computing to be done, and various inputs had to be made correctly too. It was by no means a simple or fool proof system.
Not everyone thought a head on attack was a good idea, particularly flying an Me 262 when the closing speed must have been astronomical!
"I did not understand the attack tactics of many other pilots who attacked a close formation of such 'flying fortresses' from the side, below or the front. Only if you fly in the direction of the bomber stream and attack from above, can you moderate somewhat the effect of their concentrated firepower. Although the bomber gunners could fire at us effectively from 700m, we had to close to 300m for our four MK 108 cannons to be effective."
Oblt. Walther Schuck 3./JG7
Head on attacks were not the norm and reading many combat reports and pilot accounts, they were not the most frequent method of attack. Sometimes, when more than one pass was made at a formation, different methods were used.
"After I had twice attacked the leading Pulk of the formation from the front, I made my third attack from the low rear."
Fw. Herbert Zimmer 8./JG3
Even when a head on attack was intended it was not always possible.
"The enemy's altitude was reached in quadrant CQ-5. The prolonged turn of the enemy formation made a head on attack impossible, so the Gruppe prepared an attack from the high rear."
Unit Combat Report JG 11
The attack from the front was an officially sanctioned tactic, but it was not the only one. It was a method developed by Hauptmann Mayer of JG 2 in conjunction with other commanders of the units of Luftflotte 3. Mayer argued that such an attack stood the best chance of hitting the cockpit of the bomber and killing its crew, thus effectively destroying the bomber. He also reckoned that the defensive armament of the bombers was weakest in this area. Being an active combat pilot he put his theory to the test and reported to Galland.
As a result Galland sent the following memo to all Luftwaffe fighter units. It was titled 'Kamfanweisung fur die Jagd und Zerstorerverbande', Roughly 'Battle instructions for the fighter and destroyer units'.
"1. The diving attack from the front by Hptm. Mayer was very effective and resulted in the immediate destruction of a B-17.
2. His Nos. 2 and 3 were seriously damaged when they pulled up behind the formation after the attack. This is not recommended.
3. Hptm. Mayer's second attack was also successful. In this case he dived in front of a bomber, pulled up to make his attack, and dived away in a tight bank, climbing back up ahead of the formation. He received no defensive fire.
4 General conclusions.
a. Attacks from the rear on close formations are seldom successful and bring heavy losses. If it is necessary to attack from the rear, fire at engines and fuel tanks from a steep bank.
b. Attacks from the side can be effective. These require training and a good firing angle.
c. Frontal attacks at low speed from straight ahead, above, or below are the most effective of all attacks. Prerequisites for success are flying skill, good aim, and continuous fire up to the closest possible distance.
d. Withdrawal is permitted only by a tight diving bank in the direction of the attacked bomber. This maximises the angular velocity and makes it impossible for the enemy gunners to draw the correct lead.
e. It is essential that fighter units attack repeatedly in great strength and mass. The defensive fire will then be dispersed and the bomber formation can be split apart."
You could say that the head on attack was favoured but it was not the only option open to a commander.
Note that attacks from ahead and astern do not involve the estimation of angle off and deflection shooting, or at least minimise these parameters. Attacks from the side do and Galland's point in 4b above about such attacks requiring training and a good firing angle refer to this perpetual problem for all WW2 air forces.
Cheers
Steve