The Sequencer does nothing helpful, it is purely for determining which
previous stages should cause
subsequent stages to activate. It does not control the order in which subsequent stages are activated, other than through the happenstance of what order the links were attached in (seems to be in reverse order of attachment), and a Nested Condition stage serves equally well for this - better, indeed, as Nested Condition does not need a prior stage whereas Sequencer does. No, the only two answers are to hand-code the job control, or use a Server Job that calls the sleep command. The former might be ok for simple cases, but if you have a complex sequence with branches and many jobs in parallel, then attaching a single Server Job in front of the activities that want to be delayed is by far the best choice.
This is the actual job design that I want to implement the staggering, so that J1, J2, J3, J5, and J6 don't all start simultaneously:
Code: Select all
+----+ +----+ +----+
| J1 | | J2 | | J3 |
+----+ +----+ +----+
| | |
+-------------------------+
| S1 |
+-------------------------+
|
+----+ +----+
| J4 | | J5 |
+----+ +----+
\ /
+-------------------+ +----+
| S2 | | J6 |
+-------------------+ +----+
\ /
+-------------+
| J7 |
+-------------+
If you really want to re-implement the sequencing of all that in Basic, then good luck...