I find that Mike Kim's method is especially helpful for sufficient assumption questions because of how it makes you think in terms of "takes for granted" or "fails to consider."

First, make sure you clearly understand the conclusion, support, and relationship between the two, so that you can state it in terms of "Y because of X." Once you have found that relationship, pause and force yourself to put it in terms of "takes for granted" or "fails to consider"---either "takes for granted that just because she's a good student, she studies hard," or alternatively, "fails to consider that other zoo animals could be taller than him, even though he's the tallest giraffe." Whichever is more intuitive for you for the relevant question stem.

If you've done all that really intentionally, plugging the gap between conclusion and support should often be quite straightforward: if what you've identified is a "takes for granted" issue, a sufficient assumption would turn what was taken for granted into something that's absolutely true. (For "Takes for granted that just because she's a good student, she studies hard," a suff. assumption would be, "If you're a good student, you study hard.") If it's a "fails to consider" issue, a sufficient assumption would eliminate alternative explanations. (A sufficient assumption that would fix "Fails to consider that other zoo animals could be taller than him, even though he's the tallest giraffe," would be something like, "No other zoo animals could be taller than the tallest giraffe.")

@ Yeah I put my sound at like level one and it wasn't too bad. Plus my proctor shut up in like 20 seconds luckily. The weird thing for me was that I couldn't hear my proctor at all until the test started, and then suddenly when it started, her mic came on... Idk man.

@ The one-minute countdown didn't subtract from your 35 minutes of section time! It was definitely a nice and unexpected perk.