To begin, no matter what I do, unless the questions is super easy, I cannot identify what is necessary for a conclusion to be true. I've tried finding a stategy that works for me, but nothing is clicking.
Common suggestions that don't work and why:
Negation technique - Even if I negate something and say it's not true, when I look back at the stimulus the conclusion no longer seems wholeheartedly sound. But it ends up being wrong all the time. Even if I negate something, I cannot identify why it's necessary or not.
Must be True - I suck at MBT questions, but even those are easier than NA's. But again, for the same reason as above, I can't look at a question and identify what is necessary for the argument to be true.
Identify the Gap - Most of the time I ask myself, why does P-> C, which I know is used for Sufficent questions, but it's the only stategy that actually feels like a stategy. But I can't identify a gap or flaw in the logic, becuase 9/10 I'm wrong.
Is there any other stategy to tackling these questions than using the negation technique that could help me identify what is necessary for an argument to take place?


It seems obvious to me that a question type that, on average, appears less than once per test that I have never answered incorrectly should not be ranked "highest priority"!
(Note "Miscellany" and "Logical continuation.")
On all of these question types, I am above goal accuracy, but they are still labled "high priority"!