LuxXeon posted at 3:22PM Mon, 11 January 2021 - #4409772 . . . and using the ngons allowed me to create a lot more detail with minimal polygon count. Each model is less than 100 polygons. It would have been impossible to do using quads.

Eh, maybe? But probably not really. While the "forward facing" poly count might seem lower, the model is almost certainly converted to triangles at render time [I don't know of any render engine that doesn't], and the software itself is still dealing with the same number of vertices, so I'd be dubious of any performance benefit there as well. If anything there might be a small negative impact, as its possible the software is constantly calculating those ngons as tho they were triangles? Obviously, in the case of objects with only 100 polygons, you'd never notice a difference performance wise, but I wonder, if you stacked a significant amount of geometry up, quads/tris in one mesh, and ngons in another with an equal amount of vertices, if you might not see more favorable performance from the quads/tris mesh? Can't deny that the ngons will be likely be more pleasing to the eye while working than a mesh that's triangulated every which way, but I think claiming a "low polycount" on account of ngons is a bit of a trap.

Not saying, "don't use ngons" cause you know what you're doing, just quibbling over how you justify them. ;)

Core i7 950@3.02GHz | 12GB Corsair Dominator Ram@1600mHz | 2GB Geforce GTX 660

Lightwave | Blender | Marmoset | GIMP | Krita