<p>Option 2 is correct. You say it yourself, priority only controls what order the robots move in. There's nothing in the rules about cancelling a robot's move.</p>
<p>From page 6 of the Wizards edition:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Priority</strong></p>
<p>The priority numbers on each Program card indicate a robot’s
priority for that register phase—how quickly it moves. Whenever
robots are likely to bump into each other, <strong>use the priority numbers
to determine which robot moves first</strong>. A higher number means
faster movement, so a robot with a 200 card would move before
a robot with a 100 card.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(Emphasis mine)</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-11-23T21:23:06.313Z
You do need to carry out the moves in order, because you may end up pushing robots into the various traps or off the board, etc.
Hao Ye
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-11-24T20:46:05.530Z
For what it's worth, when explaining priority and pushing, I usually use a setup where one robot is facing the other, but the second is facing to the side: `>^` That makes it more obvious that you need to think about which happens first, and once you have that habit, you can handle the other cases too.
Cascabel
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-11-24T21:14:28.320Z
@Jefromi Yeah, what's really silly is that the example in the rulebook of movement priority is one in which the movement order doesn't actually matter at all!
GendoIkari
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-01-04T21:16:24.417Z
I don't know which edition you are referring two. On the bottom of page 6 of the revision I have, I see exactly the same example as suggested @Jefromi
kasperd
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-11-23T17:25:29.227Z
2015-11-23T19:09:58.347Z
2020-06-17T09:01:24.697Z
GendoIkari
<p>Question regarding pushing other robots. Say we have the following scenario: </p>

<ul>
<li>Robot A and B are facing each other. </li>
<li>A plays "Move 3" with priority 800</li>
<li>B plays "move 2" wity priority 700</li>
</ul>

<p>Where do the robots end up? </p>

<p>We have played the situation as A wins over B, and B's movement is cancelled out. It seemed to make the most sense. But further reading of the rules says that priority only determines the order moves are carried out.</p>

<p>So which is correct:</p>

<ol>
<li>A pushes B three squares</li>
<li>A pushes B three squares and then B pushes A two squares. </li>
</ol>

<robo-rally>
Pushing robots and priority
Fredrik
# Pushing robots and priority

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-11-23)

Question regarding pushing other robots. Say we have the following scenario:

* Robot A and B are facing each other.
* A plays "Move 3" with priority 800
* B plays "move 2" wity priority 700

Where do the robots end up?

We have played the situation as A wins over B, and B's movement is cancelled out. It seemed to make the most sense. But further reading of the rules says that priority only determines the order moves are carried out.

So which is correct:

1. A pushes B three squares
2. A pushes B three squares and then B pushes A two squares.

**Tags:** robo-rally


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2015-11-23. Score: 17 | Accepted answer

Option 2 is correct. You say it yourself, priority only controls what order the robots move in. There's nothing in the rules about cancelling a robot's move.

From page 6 of the Wizards edition:

> **Priority**
>
> The priority numbers on each Program card indicate a robot’s
> priority for that register phase—how quickly it moves. Whenever
> robots are likely to bump into each other, **use the priority numbers
> to determine which robot moves first**. A higher number means
> faster movement, so a robot with a 200 card would move before
> a robot with a 100 card.

(Emphasis mine)

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: You do need to carry out the moves in order, because you may end up pushing robots into the various traps or off the board, etc.  
> **username_3**: For what it's worth, when explaining priority and pushing, I usually use a setup where one robot is facing the other, but the second is facing to the side: `>^` That makes it more obvious that you need to think about which happens first, and once you have that habit, you can handle the other cases too.  
> **username_1**: @Jefromi Yeah, what's really silly is that the example in the rulebook of movement priority is one in which the movement order doesn't actually matter at all!  
> **username_4**: I don't know which edition you are referring two. On the bottom of page 6 of the revision I have, I see exactly the same example as suggested @Jefromi  

---

