Yes, I know they are two separate issues. Let's focus on the pilot ability - the
elimination of the indirect fire modifier. Now, what causes that modifier to
come into play to start with? If the answer to that question is the presence
of blocking terrain, and Tadashi's ability ignores that modifier, then Vanek's
ability should nullify Tadashi's.

Again, Vanek's ability -


SENTINEL - While this unit is able, all units ignore abilities, gear, and special
equipment that would treat a blocked line of fire as clear.


And Tadashi's ability -


NOWHERE TO HIDE (optional) When this unit targets a figure with an indirect-
fire ranged combat attack, the target does not get +3 to its defense value
for that attack. If the attack succeeds, score damage to the target equal to
the attacker's damage value, maximum 3 instead of 2.


See, I interpret the indirect fire modifier as follows - you're firing over blocking
terrain at a target you don't have a visual on. Because of this the shot is
more difficult. Hence, the +3 modifier to the target's defense. Indirect fire,
on it's own, doesn't really treat LOF as clear. If it did, there wouldn't be a
defense modifier associated with it. You need something working in concert
with indirect fire, like pilot abilities or streak missiles, for LOF to be considered
clear. Now, what is it that makes the LOF clear in these instances? Simply put,
it's the elimination of the indirect fire modifier.

So, Yami/Tadashi can still indirect with Scrub/Vanek in play - they just do so
with the +3 indirect fire modifier applied, IMHO.

NOWHERE TO HIDE (optional) When this unit targets a figure with an indirect-
fire ranged combat attack, the target does not get +3 to its defense value
for that attack. If the attack succeeds, score damage to the target equal to
the attacker's damage value, maximum 3 instead of 2.

The pilot ability doesn't state that LOF is clear, you can't assume that because the DV modifier doesn't get applied that means LOF is clear. I think the intent of this pilot is that he is really good at making an indirect attack thus no DV bonus and a higher maximum damage. Also if it were treating LOF as clear then electronic camo would be the counter that it is to this ability.

You're right, it's not stated anywhere in Tadashi's ability description that he
treats LOF as clear. Here's the thing - does Tadashi's ability, by ignoring the
indirect fire modifier, effectively treat LOF as clear? If, as I believe, it does then
his ability is subject to Vanek's ability as it is stated. I'm sure I'm far from the
only one who feels this way about this.

Also note that blocking terrain does not cause the +3 defense. The indirect attack is what causes that. Do you need blocking terrain to do an indirect attack? No. Mechs could be blocking the LOF forcing the indirect attack. You can also do an indirect attack when you already have a clear LOF. Why do you want to do such a thing? Simple: you want to limit your 6 damage attack to only 2 damage to salvage something instead of eliminating it. Useful tactic but very limited.

In other words: indirect attacks are commonly linked with blocking terrain but really doesn't have anything to do with blocking terrain. Blocking terrain is not required for it.

the pilot clearly negates all abilities/gear/sec that give a "clear line of fire)

indirect attack is a alternate form of ranged combat Yami and Cynosure just have improved indirect attacks.

if the ability said "they ignore blocking terrain for line of fire purpose with a 3 max dmg" then Matt Vaneks ability would work against them.

but Jules in Jack for instance is countered , the DF/SC SA is countered, and basicly every streak and homing beacon gear. im sure there may be one or two more it counters.

Good point. i agree.

Okee-dokee, then. I'll bow to the overall consensus on this. ;)

Thanks all!

I thought the wording of the SC/DF SA meant it cannot be countered by Scrub's ability. It would be great if we can clarify this. :-)