Re-architect to avoid the problem
In most situations with sequential, the assumption is that one control is at max before the next is activated, or is at zero before the prior one is moved. Is why the max or min values get transmitted as passed and the next control is activated.
Why not re-architect as follows:
You keep your picker as the supercontrol, send on release only.
Two sub controls.
First is 512 named ticks, 128 0s, 128 1s, 128 2s, 128 3s, type channel changer -> second control.
Second is 512 named ticks, 0-127 repeated 4 times.
In my test, this only sends the desired final value.