Supporting fighter dogfights versus standard dogfights

[prelude_to_war]

Do dogfight situations created via the 'Supporting Ships' rule take precedence over non-CAP initiated dogfights?

So if an attacker chooses to engage my supporting fighters in a dogfight, then attack my supported ship with other fighters, per the 'Supporting Ships' rule, can my fighters disregard the initial dogfight and dogfight the fighters attacking my supported ship?

 

[MongooseMatt]

No - a dogfight cannot just be ignored! Think of it as having your supporting fighters being overwhelmed, allowing others to get through.

 

[Alexb83]

Well, that solves the ambiguity of the 'immediate move' in the written rule - can the next version be re-worded to account for this? (either in defining what constitutes an 'attack' on the supported ship, or a caveat on the 'immediate' [i.e. after any dogfights])?

Another one - I think it states that after an intercept move where it wins, the supporting fighter 'may' move back to its supporting ship. If it does not, and remains at the point where it intercepted, does it still count as being in support (despite being off the base)?

Also, perhaps it's just me and my lack of thorough reading, but can the sequence of 'activations' in the fighter turn be laid out in a more straightforward fashion next time? (at least in revised rules it is broken up by diagrams and a page break making it not too clear)

I.e.
initiative winner moves all fighters
initiative winner engages dogfights (where applicable)
initiative loser makes any supporting moves (where applicable)
initiative winner shoots fighters
initiative loser engages any of his dogfights

The distinction between points 2 and 3 has come up elsewhere, and is quite important for fighters who can get close to dogfights, but can't engage, but may have a chance to shoot the victor if their friends die...