It’s difficult to follow a set of rules, especially when the rules tend to bend depending on whose interpretation to use for delineating or inferring data. Assessing planetary strength properly, and inferring what any two points, aspects or dimensions to use is proving difficult.
I could have one potential solution for your problem that I personally adopt. If we focus on the theoretical planetary strength using all factors it might be useful to use take into account all relative positions and tables (I personally made my own using Hellenistic considerations, being dissatisfied with the medieval and renaissance tables or ones based for almutens - https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=121676).
However, if one studies a topic, it would be much easier and better to focus on just few primary factors - angularity, domicile, exaltation, retrograde or direct, sect and aspects. Whether a planet is favorably placed, slightly favorably placed, average, slightly unfavorably placed or unfavorably placed can be easily glanced in a few seconds using those conditions.
And another hint, instead of trying to focus on the stars and trying to come up with potential manifestations based on the placements, I find it much easier to focus on the topic, and then investigate the planets that are related to that topic, for example the houserulers. Ptolemy mentions this difficulty in the early authors, who try to use all planets, aspects and house placements at the same time, instead of focusing on parents, siblings, occupation, marriage, travel etc. one by one as Ptolemy does in the Tetrabiblos.
Last edited: