In the examples I provide both fly by figure-eight. Magnus balloon has a low L/D ratio and flies slowly, while Ampyx wing has a high L/D ratio and flies fast. Magnus balloon has also a high lift coefficient, but its power consumption is too high as the tangential speed is high.
From https://www.google.com/search?q=aircraft+turn+rate+formula+squared+speed&oq=aircraft&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l2j69i57j0l4j69i61.12119j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 : " As the aircraft turns , if the airspeed increases with the bank angle held constant, the radius of turn increases with the square of the speed (r=V211.26tanθ ft). Hence, the distance traveled during the turn increases as the square of the speed."
The main reason to make tight loops would be in order to improve the “power to space use ratio” but the AWE world does not care of this ratio.
In fact the swept area cannot be advantageously reduced by using the same long tether because the tether is responsible for the space use. So the rigid wing should scale. Besides significant problems (cubed mass, high risk…) I don’t see how a large rigid wing could reduce the swept area without losing lift, “rolling in the loop” looking to be a dangerous maneuver in the time.
If you think about a network of kites, indeed it is different. I do not think there is an available technology to do it at high scale with safety control enough, because too numerous parameters are involved. Particularly a network would fail with sudden wind changes. The existing objects are not often networks. Aircrafts are not networks, wind turbines are not networks. In the other hand trains are networks but in a linear way.
I could agree but the figure I quoted (Ampyx) is hugely huge. By using soft wings the figure could be only large. And the swept area of the Magnus rig I quoted is quite small in regard to the harnessed power, a current wind turbine being yet better.
It depends on the scale it can reach.