"but in general your whole problem is connected with this -> LonaRPG\Text\ENG\DataEquip.txt and this LonaRPG\Data\Effects\Armors (SurBot, SurMid, SurMidExtra, SurTop) which can be fixed in literally 5 minutes just as you want (Btw - I still don't understand what the devs problem is with making an accurate description since constantly taking off and putting on clothes again and again to find out the increase is somehow... annoying)."
This is exactly why I was starting to make a pseudo mod of the descriptions for the English translation to include the numbered stats, I'm not sure how to make it into an actual loadable mod rather than replacing the base files themself, so I just keep backups of the originals. Then ran into my issue of the original translated description not matching the code for the stat changes for this armor which halted progress to see if I could figure what was the correct stats or description for this armor set and if the stats were intended as they are or if the description was intended since it causes some confusion.
Right now my issue is the inconsistencies of the original description vs coded stat changes:
SurTop
\C[6]Increases DEF, SPD, SUR, and SCU.\n
"attribute_name": "move_speed",
"attribute_type": "max",
"adjustor": "+",
"adjustment": "0.05"
The Top passes both requirements; it has a increase like the description says and patch notes said it's not to be affected by the 0.1 nerf.
SurMid
\C[6]Increases DEF, SPD, SUR, and SCU.\n
"attribute_name": "move_speed",
"attribute_type": "max",
"adjustor": "-",
"adjustment": "0.05"
The Mid is the first outlier and does not have an increase nor does it have the full -0.1 like the nerf said. I half thought this might be a combined value of the original speed increase plus the nerf. +0.05 - 0.1 and you get the -0.05. Which is technically a speed increase compared to other armors that have the speed nerf, but on its own it's slower than not wearing it so it doesn't match the original description saying it increases SPD.
SurBot
\C[6]Increases DEF, SPD, SUR, and SCU.\n
"attribute_name": "move_speed",
"attribute_type": "max",
"adjustor": "+",
"adjustment": "0.1"
Bot is an increase like the description indicates but doesn't have any nerf which the patch said only "Top"s lack nerfs; so not sure what it's going for here, maybe related to the flavor text "I'm not wearing pants!~ ...B-Because wearing pants will just slow me down!"?
SurMidExtra
\C[6]Increases DEF, SPD, SUR, and SCU.\n
"attribute_name": "move_speed",
"attribute_type": "max",
"adjustor": "+",
"adjustment": "0.05"
"attribute_name": "move_speed",
"attribute_type": "max",
"adjustor": "-",
"adjustment": "0.1"
MidExtra has both an increase in speed and the intended nerf, but for some reason does 2 separate codes to do it. Plus as you can see in the screenshot, it just looks kinda dumb having both speeds mentioned. This could be trimmed down code wise to only have one code and just have it -0.05 like Mid does, assuming that is even the correct speed stat this set is going for in the first place, but again that'd be an overall decrease not an increase in speed when you equip it.
Right now if you have the entire set equipped you get a +0.05 speed increase, but the separate parts on their own don't all have positives toward speed like the description indicates.
So in general the code and original descriptions are just not in sync so pieces of the armor separately don't all follow what they say they should in terms of increasing speed. Either speed increase should be removed entirely from the armor pieces and it only be for "DEF, SCU, and SUR" as well as the description be fixed for that change or the code should be changed to actually increase the speed, which goes against the nerf that was supposed to buff Exhibitionist, which at that point might need another buff. This armor is in a weird spot right now.
Also minor note since I brought up Exhibitionist, the patch mentioned Exhibitionist gets 0.03 per exposed part, three total parts, but the chest gives 0.04. Probably cause 0.1 looks better math and gameplay wise, just noting since one would think it would have been 0.09.
