Talk:GN-001 Gundam Exia

Doesn't it look like Exia Repair still has one beam dagger left? Kuruni 04:17, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Nah, Setsuna stabbed all Exia's weapon into the Alvaaron(except for it's GN Sword/Rifle) (Sorry for very-very late replying=[)--Kiraowen 07:21, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

GN Sefer?
Do we have a citation for Exia being compatible with the GN Sefer?--Nkuzmik 14:03, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

GN Sefer was featured in magazines, showing how its components are fully compatible with docking with any Gundam 3rd generation Gundam. That is due to the part GN Sefer help design GN Arms. Wasabi 15:41, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, kvetching withdrawn. --Nkuzmik 16:28, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know,the showcase in the magazine was only showing off the compabilities of the actual models.The actual GN Sefer model may have been designed with combining with other Gundams,but this was to make the kit interesting,not because it can actually be done in a storyline perspective.I think it was stated so if I'm not mistaken.

This is not the only instance either,the same thing goes for 00 Archer.Thew 2 are not actually compatible,but are designed in http://images.wikia.com/common/__cb30567/skins/common/images/button_link.pngreal life to be so to give modelers some interesting options.The same thing goes XN Raiser was well,which can even be showned to be able to dock with Susanowo,which is not true storywise.

This is quite a regular feature placed in some of the kits from time to time.Usually,they should be able to enter the grey canon territory if they've gotten their own linearts,which is probably why 00 XN Raiser and XN 00 Gundam can be considered canon in some small form,even if we have gotten no instant that an actual physical version of XN Raiser was built yet.

SonicSP 17:16, October 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * kay, then my objection is re-registered. Now that I think about it, MG Freedom's wings and MG Strike's packs all use the same connection.  I had the Freedom's wings on my Strike for about 10 minutes.--Nkuzmik 17:45, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Well think about it on a logical way. GN Sefer was a the prototype design to 0 Raiser and GN Arms. I don't know about you guys, but any developmental mobile tend to be compatible with other units. Even if not used for any docking, it can be a partner unit like GN Archer (without the docking). Exia RII may have been upgraded, but it can still use GN Arms or use other spare GN weapons. The Gundams more or less have very similar body structures, so logically it could be utilized; if you feel just because it was scene or officially published makes it suspicious, then I want object to you guys getting rid of GN Sefer, but at the same time in theory and logically, it can be used. Wasabi 22:35, October 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * With respect, sir, I feel that you are making basing your arguments on some weak propositions.


 * Developmental hardware tends to be one-off work that is intended for proof of concept or validation and verification. Interfacing developmental hardware with other equipment is often a finicky process. Lessons learned in the developmental stages are then used to refine the production version.


 * Furthermore, there are some rather profound structural changes that occur with each generation of Gundam development, even in refitting an existing design. Please see Talk:GN-001REII_Gundam_Exia_Repair_II.


 * Further evidence suggesting an cross generational hardware incompatibility can be found in comparing images of and . Please examine the left forearm of each suit and you notice the characteristic "docking port" that is used by virtually all GN powered units in this series. The RII's port has been resized, and relocated, to make it consistent with the 4th generation Gundams.


 * Now you point out a willingness on my part to discount the graphic evidence that you have provided in support of your position. I admit this may be capricious on my part however, as SonicSP stated, the model designers at Bandai have designed the kits for this series with a degree of interchangeability that is in not indicated in the show or manga.  I reject the evidence of Exia being able to use the GN Sefer on the basis that said evidence stems from the same source that tells us of the Susanowo XN Raiser.  Because other evidence from your source is suspect, the evidence you cite is then suspect.
 * --Nkuzmik 13:50, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Have we found a source for the GN Sefer working with any Gen 3 or Gen 4 gundams that can be attributed to something other than non-cannon model features?--Nkuzmik 17:12, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

I loaded this subject in the main GN Sefer page, but apparently nobody noticed it. Take a look and tell me what you think. Wasabi 23:01, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Split Exia Repair or Keep?
Since every different version of MS's have been split, should Gundam Exia Repair get the same treatment? For now, it's only a redirect link. What you think? Wasabi 00:05, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * Nah.. exia repair is same mobile suit (with replacement parts?), we shouldn't split a page off every time a mobile suit is repaired or partially repaired. Simant 00:14, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * Concur. Its just a field expdient repair.  If it was something different, like grafting a Tiern's arm on or something, maybe. --Nkuzmik 03:30, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * No, Exia Repair is the same Exia with its arm chopped off and a Tieren eye. Suits like the R2 and the three GNHW types are the same suits, just upgraded substantially. Gaeaman788 04:11, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Repair version should be split. It's just like Dynames without one of the legs, like when Ptolemy was being attacked by HRL in space--YessMasster 16:53, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry the consensus was reached to keep Exia Repair in with plain old Exia

--Nkuzmik 15:58, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Rear image
FYI Taikage, the image of Exia's rear, if you look closely enough, has an extra GN Sword/Rifle instead of a shield. Just to let you know --Gaeaman788 04:20, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Eh, the original CG Artist took down the original image of Exia, the front view one. It was originally a single pic, but the man has since changed the site and moved around the pics. If you can back track the history of that guy's page, maybe you can recover the pic...that or replace the front one with the dual GN Sword/Rifle since you know where the site is now.

Wasabi 05:27, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

GN Swrod/Rifle
Why was my contribution about GN Sword/Rifle removed? As far as i'm concerned attacks with GN Sword were slower than with other weapons, which was proven in first fight with Graham, when Setsuna needed to switch to Beam Sabre as Flag dodged all of Setsuna's attacks


 * I'm sorry but I don't recall exactly what you said. What was the text of your edit.  Also, please remember to sign you posts to the talk page. --Nkuzmik 14:38, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for not signing,

I wrote in the article: "Due to it's enormous size attacks with this weapon are relatively slow. When facing faster opponents Setsuna has to witch to either one of the GN Blades or Beam Saber" --YessMasster 16:48, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * That was addressed within the Tech and Combat Characteristics.
 * Small beam blades, GN Beam Daggers are used as throwing weapons or when an enemy gets too close for anything else. Virtually weightless GN Beam Sabers allow Exia to match faster oppoents, who might otherwise evade a physical blade[1].

Ahh, ok then, I must have missed it--YessMasster

Petition to Remove Rear CG Image
I'm petitioning to remove the rear CG image from the main image article [IE the top spot].I find the usage of potraying Exia with 2 GN Swords is misleading as its standard equipment does not list it as such.Not to mention a configuration like that was never used anyways.I suggest it be kept in the gallery,where people can still admire the coolness of the pic if they want to but I think it should not be at the top page at the front section of the article,as it mispotrays the "standard" look of Exia.This problem isnt limited to Exia article in my opinion,but I intend to raise the issue first with Exia.

The other one is fine.I suggest either we find a rear counterpart for that one with the single GN Sword or we just leave it there as the only image at the top.SonicSP 11:15, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

Well I finally found and fixed the image; you better be damn content. :P Wasabi 07:39, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

No that image is way 2ugly CHANGE ITCHANGEITNOW!!!!!!!

Just kidding,that image looks great and matches the other one.Thanks,dude.^_^-SonicSP 10:53, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Its "GN Sword" Not "GN Sword/Rifle"
Since I've seen it reverted back to sword/rifle a few times already,I'll make this for future references.

Now Exia's main solid sword weapon?Its called the "GN Sword";not the GN Sword/Rifle.It never has been named that for the weapon and we simply can't put it as a name just because it can do that function.

Its a sword that has a beam rifle function,so yes it has a beam rifle as a function.However,it doesnt change the fact that the sword is not called that officially.A weapon is named by whats stated to be named,and only that.Regardless of other function it might have aside from main one.

Take Arios's GN Beam Shield,the Beam Shield is stated and seen to have the ability to act as claws.Infact anime-wise its only been seen acting as claws.However,this function does not at all change the fact that the weapon is officially called GN Beam Shield.

Nadleeh's GN Beam Rifle is called GN Beam Rifle and it has a beam saber mode.......but its not called the GN Rifle/Beam Saber is it?Just like the GN Sword II is not called the GN Sword/Rifle/Beam Saber/Launcher II........its just called GN Sword II,no more no less.

You don't see 00 Seven Sword's be called GN Buster Sword/Shield/Field Generator II either........its just called GN Buster Sword II,like its mentioned to be.

I think I made enough examples.SonicSP 20:39, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Drive Burst Ability
I'm not sure whether it was ever in the article or not but its not at the time of this writing. The Drive Burst ability that is showcaed by R2 should be included in the article because it is an ability of the original Exia, or more specifically an ability of Exia's cone. According to the MG Exia manual it was an ability available from original Exia rather than an add on for R2 however it was not used very often because of its unstabality. -SonicSP 18:05, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

Photo Talk! D=!
I think the Picture Gallery should be lessened by a bit. too many not needed photos, I think. But before any of you start removing photos just because you think it is not needed, you should suggest it here and we will have a consensus on whether it stays or goes. Dav7d2 12:53, December 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Alright, I'll start with this, Sd Exia. I vote remove. -SonicSP 14:49, December 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * I was thinking the last SD would be the one to be removed.


 * My opinion, the first 4th and 4th last can be removed. That pic with caption "Exia intersects Tieren" can go too. Same with "GN-001 EXIA". --Bronx01 15:02, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

Add another removal vote from me for the (MS Girl Exia) as well. -SonicSP 15:57, December 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Girl versions of the Mobile Suits seemed to be acceptable by the community. It's also a fan art, and we are never really against fan arts (except on Profile images). Hmmm... do you think it's time for the community to discuss what pic are need to be posted on the site? --Bronx01 16:18, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

I'm fine with fanarts but this one in particular seem totally irrelevant to me, anyways that's just my vote. We have to get the voting before we can remove any of it as the topic suggested. I will also vote to remove the Exia R2 pic, but only so we can move it to the R2 page where it seems more fitting. (not that it's unfitting but if were gonna remove stuff around, I thought putting it there would be a nicer fitting touch IMO since David suggested the gallery is overloaded)

This is getting a bit disorganised. How about we create a separate section below for the actual "voting", that way it would be easy to keep up with the votes for a specific image. We can use the current section for the actual discussion, making the voting section clean and organised. -SonicSP 16:57, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

PhotoTalk Part 2: Voting
Let's start with this one. Bring forth any image you want to put up for a vote but keep each image grouped together with their respective votes (Ive numbered this two, just continue with each new pic brought in). Oh and be kind and adjust the counter after casting your vote. Make sure you post a link to the photo when you bring it up for voting.

Important: Make sure you position your post under the photo your voting but above a different photo. For example, if you want to vote for "photo 1)" make sure it's under the last vote posted there but above the next pic voting. Easier for us to keep count on which pic is getting what votes.

1) (MS Girl Exia) Keep:2 Remove:1


 * I vote for removal. -SonicSP 17:12, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I vote keep. Dav7d2 18:16, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep it We have MS Girl on almost all the other pagesGaeaman788 19:01, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

2) (SD Exia) Keep:0 Remove2


 * Voted for removal. -SonicSP 17:12, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I vote remove. Dav7d2 18:16, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

3) Keep:0 Remove:2
 * vote to remove --Bronx01 17:54, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I vote to remove. Dav7d2 18:16, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

4) Keep:0 Remove:4
 * vote to remove --Bronx01 17:54, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I second that. -SonicSP 17:56, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I vote to remove. Dav7d2 18:16, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I fourth thatGaeaman788 19:01, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

5) Keep:0 Remove:4
 * vote to remove --Bronx01 17:54, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Remove. -SonicSP 17:57, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Remove also. Dav7d2 18:16, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Remove.--CrusaderRedG21 18:52, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Eliminate itGaeaman788 19:01, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

6) Keep:0 Remove:2
 * vote to remove --Bronx01 17:54, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Remove! Dav7d2 18:16, December 6, 2010 (UTC)