Calling a setter? That's not what happened.
I already compensated and shortened the script with a combo position for instead of writing a comboat(x,y) and shortened it into a 0-175 for instead.
Then I went and wrote out hundreds of lines of code to save the data and set it back at the push of a button in the same similar fashion as I wrote out in my example code for a hypothetical situation and got the results I was looking for which in no way "called a setter" but instead saved the combo data of every combo on an entire map by equating their values to a combo number on an array just as I described.
The only difference is that I had to manually write an array for every individual screen instead of an array that accesses other arrays as I had suggested for a future release.
I did this because the maps indices are limited to the point of 256 total maps, whereas writing all combo data to a series of arrays bypasses that limitation.
Also, I didn't call setters and expecting a return, those lines of code would in fact write to an array, not return anything.