Got to say I find this new development somewhat worrying.

I have used PH_POLY before under the illusion that it was working fine, in most cases with nothing that appeared to be wrong. I recently posted some quiries about this bcz ph_POLY was behaving wierdly, now it seems this is bcz PH_POLY never really worked and certainly doesn't with the later versions of A6...

TBH This makes no sense to me at all.

Models set to polygon=on, react with physics correctly already, or at least they seem too. So what point is the ph_POLY???

Ok lets try and look at this with some clarity.

I have an object, lets say a mushroom shape, I can either use PH_SPHERE, PH_BOX or maybe PH_CYLINDER but not POLY? So none of these physics shapes suits my model, and the only one that would is unavailable.

I have to say If this is the case, I completely agree with Fogman, and I now have some major concerns after spending 14 months developing something that I now find is not actually possible in A6 despite having test environments that I did 18-24 months ago before embarking on this latest project.

Can I ask, why is PH_POLY not available? Personally I was hoping to put togethether a system that used a low-poly collision hull set to PH_POLY with attached high_poly models, to save collision processing time and improve performance... but now I find I can only use fundemental poly shapes...

What on earth am i going to do with my UH-60 for collisions now???

I look forward to reading the responses from Conitec and the community about this matter with interest.