Same

Ok, but what I'm gathering from this question is that we now use some information from outside of the conclusion to join concepts together so that we can arrive at an answer.

For example, like you say, "What people really want" is referenced outside of the MC. However, there are very few examples until now in which we have to deviate out of the Main Conclusion to prove an answer. So my question is:

When exactly do we use supporting information/premises to prove the main point? Considering my understanding of the nature of MP/MC questions which require that you normally almost ignore all premises to get to the right answer...

At what point, or how often do we rely on information from outside of the conclusion to prove the conclusion, if, for example, most questions we're taught to stick to the conclusion for proving the main point.