Yes, and this is the problem. If a rule is #205 and you want to move it to be #190, you can't simply use the ^ button. You can only move the rule to position 201 [the first rule on the second page]. It is mind-boggling that the editor does not have the capability to move it to any position in the ruleset.
So you have to work around it by using a bunch of user shenanigans: 1)move the rule to the top of the second page[#201], 2) delete rule #200, so that #201 moves onto the first page, replacing #200, 3)move it to the position on the first page where you want it, 4)manually create and add the rule that used to be #200, now it will be #201, at the top of the second page.
It's a mess, and I see no other way to do it. The editor is simply not built to correctly handle rule order manipulation, especially if there are more than 200 rules. Why not simply have a selection button at the bottom of the list that selects how many rules are to be visible on a page? Like Google: How many results to be shown on one page? 20/50/100/200/300
But it doesn't stop there. It isn't even convenient to re-order rules when there are only 200 of them, either.
The capability to order the rules in the rules editor is sorely lacking in features that the old interface had. A glaring one is the inability to drag/drop the rules into position; this we were able to do before this inferior ruleset editor replaced the old one. So, if a rule is say, #190 and you want it to be #60, you have to hit the little ^ button 130 times to get it there. What dev in their right mind made that decision?
Couple that shortcoming with the inability to move rules between pages of the list and it is a big fail. Don't get me wrong; I have been an ESET user for more than 15 years and have complete faith in the function of the software, but to be honest, it isn't particularly user-friendly anymore.
I complained about the lack of drag/drop and other regressions 4 YEARS AGO, in this thread: https://forum.eset.com/topic/9625-eset-9x-ui-is-a-total-disappointment-much-worse-than-before/
And itman, you were a contributor to that thread as well.
That was when it was version 9.x. It's now at 13.x and NOTHING has been done. Marcos reported it to the devs then. Apparently it is not an important enough feature to be worked on.