I think I'm misunderstanding what genre this game is.
You said "Your attitude cannot grow anymore, but it can go down to slave, and even worse, each time your attitude goes down, your submission rises." Is this supposed to be a negative thing? My attitude has been slave. For a long time. I see no negatives associated with this. I also am a sub, and always have been, and in fact started as a Sub Guy. I see no negatives associated with submission rising.
It's true that while I enjoyed this game initially, I have not been enjoying it recently. I'm wondering if this is because the very thing that I'm purposefully doing -- playing a submissive character -- is, in fact, intended as a negative outcome, and that somehow was never clear to me. Are we not supposed to be able to choose to play as a submissive character unless we want negative consequences? If so, why is this not made more obvious?
Well, I have not played the most recent update -- I was just reading the changelog -- so I don't know anything about specific numbers that may or may not need tweaking. I just thought it was really odd that slave attitude and submission are considered negative consequences when they appeared to me to be player choices. So, it sounds like your intent is that high levels of submission are considered something that the MC doesn't want. To me, this implies the MC is not intended to be submissive. But nothing about the game description, nor what I've played so far, gives any indication of that. That's why I said I might have misunderstood the genre -- because this seems to be a game mechanic that's specific to bad end simulators rather than sandbox games. But maybe your statement that the MC is canonically versatile (and I guess also a switch, even though that wasn't mentioned) was supposed to imply that the goal of the game is to avoid going too far in one direction?