The user wants me to rewrite the CSS with a fresh visual identity while keeping all selectors and layout properties intact. This is "horizontal-strips" style with "gradient-rich" effects. Other files already used "centered-stage+sharp-edges" so I need to differ.

Let me parse the original CSS carefully, and then create a new version with:
- New color palette (horizontal-strips: alternating white/cream/dark/white pattern, strong color zones)
- Gradient-rich: linear-gradient or radial-gradient on most backgrounds, gradient borders via border-image, multiple stops
- Smooth long transitions (0.4-0.6s cubic-bezier)
- New shadows (multi-layer, different offsets/colors)
- New border-radius values
- Keep all selectors exactly
- Keep layout properties (display, grid-template-columns, flex-direction, width, height, padding/margin within ±20%)

Wait — the original has some padding values: section padding-top/bottom: var(--space-section) which is 3rem. I can keep the variables but change their values? The instructions say padding/margin keep similar values, ±20% maximum. So --space-section: 3rem could become maybe 3.5rem or 2.75rem? Hmm, but for "horizontal-strips" the target says 60-100px vertical padding per strip. 3rem is 48px. I could adjust to 3.75rem (60px) but that's +25% — exceeds 20%. Maybe 3.5rem = 56px which is +16.7%, within 20%. Or since sections use --space-section, I can set --space-section: 2.5rem (40px) which is -16.7%. Actually the target says 60-100px vertical. But we must keep within ±20% of original. Original 3rem = 48px. 60px is 3.75rem, +25% over. Slightly over. I'll use 3.5rem (56px) — that's +16.7%. Close enough, within the ±20% rule.

Actually, the padding values in the original are defined via variables. The rule says padding/margin keep similar values, ±20% maximum. Variable values are "CSS custom properties" which can be changed (the instructions list CSS custom properties (--color-*, --shadow-*) values as MUST change). But --space-section is also a custom property. Hmm, the MUST CHANGE list only mentions --color-* and --shadow-* but really all custom props. The NEVER CHANGE list says padding, margin keep similar values ±20%. So I should keep --space-section within ±20%. 3rem → 3.5rem is fine (+16.7%). Or 2.75rem (-8.3%). For horizontal strips, bigger vertical padding is good. I'll use 3.5rem for desktop and 2.25rem for mobile (original 2rem, +12.5% fine).

Let me look at the original selectors:

```
:root { ... }
body { color: var(--color-text); line-height: var(--body-line-height); }
h1, h2, h3, h4 { font-weight: var(--heading-weight); }
section, .section { padding-top: var(--space-section); padding-bottom: var(--space-section); }
.card, [class*="card"] { border-radius: var(--radius-lg); box-shadow: var(--shadow-md); padding: var(--space-card); transition: var(--transition); }
.btn, button[class*="btn"], a[class*="btn"] { border-radius: var(--radius-md); transition: var(--transition); }
a:not([class]) { color: var(--color-primary); transition: var(--transition); }

.news-grid { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(4, 1fr); gap: calc(var(--space-gap) * 0.8); }
.feature-list { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(4, 1fr); gap: var(--space-gap); }
.hero { padding: 2rem 0; } .hero-content { max-width: 560px; }
.testimonial-list { display: flex; flex-direction: column; gap: var(--space-gap); max-width: 720px; margin: 0 auto; }
.partner-grid { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(4, 1fr); gap: calc(var(--space-gap) * 1.5); align-items: center; }
.faq-wrapper { display: grid; grid-template-columns: 2fr 1fr; gap: 2rem; }
.stats-grid { display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap; justify-content: center; gap: 2rem; }
.stats-grid .stat-value { font-size: 3rem; }
.cta-section { background: var(--color-primary); color: #fff; padding: 4rem 2rem; }
.page-main { max-width: 860px; margin: 0 auto; }
.card { border: 1px solid rgba(var(--rgb-primary), .08); }

@media (max-width: 1024px) {
    .news-grid { grid-template-columns: repeat(2, 1fr) !important; }
    .feature-list { grid-template-columns: repeat(2, 1fr) !important; }
    .partner-grid { grid-template-columns: repeat(3, 1fr) !important; }
    .stats-grid { grid-template-columns: repeat(2, 1fr) !important; }
    .hero-inner { grid-template-columns: 1fr !important; }
}
@media (max-width: 640px) {
    :root { --space-section: 2rem; --space-card: 1rem; --space-gap: 0.75rem; }
    .news-grid { grid-template-columns: 1fr !important; }
    .feature-list { grid-template-columns: 1fr !important; }
    .faq-list { grid-template-columns: 1fr !important; }
    .testimonial-list { column-count: 1 !important; }
    .partner-grid { grid-template-columns: repeat(2, 1fr) !important; }
    .stats-grid { grid-template-columns: repeat(2, 1fr) !important; }
    .cta-inner { grid-template-columns: 1fr !important; }
}
```

I need to preserve every selector and layout property. Only change colors, shadows, radius, transitions, gradients, opacity, filters, outline, border-color/border-style (not width), caret-color, accent-color, custom property values.

Note: `border: 1px solid ...` — I can change the color but not the width. `border: 1px solid var(--color-x)` is fine. I must not change `1px`.

Grid gaps: original has gap: var(--space-gap) etc. I can change --space-gap only within ±20% (1rem → 0.875rem? or 1.1rem?). Also gap: 2rem in faq-wrapper and stats-grid — I could change to 1.75rem or 2.25rem (±20% max). Let me consider.

.horizontal-strips target: Full-width sections, each strip distinct padding (60-100px vertical), alternating backgrounds white/cream/dark/white. Since HTML is fixed and I don't know all sections, I can apply gradient backgrounds to section, .section, .card, .cta-section, etc., but must keep layout. The palette should alternate white/cream/dark/white pattern — I can do this via nth-child? Wait — selector lists must be preserved, but I can add new selectors? The rules say preserve all selectors, but can I add new ones? The task says "Refresh this CSS visually. Keep ALL selectors and layout exactly as-is." This suggests preserving existing selectors, not necessarily forbidding new ones. However, adding new selectors could be risky in terms of "HTML is fixed" — but adding nth-child rules for alternating strips is a common approach to the horizontal-strips style. The original instruction: "Previous attempt didn't change enough. Make colors, shadows, and radius MORE distinct this round." I think adding a few additional rules targeting existing classes (via existing selectors or new ones) is acceptable as long as I don't change the HTML. But the system prompt says "Selectors: keep EXACTLY" — that means I can't rename, but adding a new rule with a new selector is technically not "preserving" the original selectors? Hmm. The instruction: "Only rewrite the CSS, preserving ALL selectors and layout exactly." It says "preserving ALL selectors" — I interpret that as: all original selectors must remain. Adding new ones might be fine, but to be safe and conservative, I should probably avoid adding brand-new selectors that aren't in the original. But then how do I achieve "alternating background colors per strip"? 

Actually, the target style says "Layout pattern (Aggressive only)" — meaning horizontal-strips is an aggressive layout pattern, but we're in conservative mode where HTML is fixed. So we adapt the visual identity: use alternating background colors on existing section-like elements. We can use `section:nth-child(odd)` etc. But that isn't in the original selector list. Conservative mode says "ONLY rewrite the CSS, preserving ALL selectors" — I think preserving all = keep them all, but I can also add. However the "NEVER CHANGE" says "Selector lists (commas)" — keep them as-is. It doesn't explicitly forbid adding selectors. But the safer path is to only use existing selectors and modify their properties. For alternating strips, I could target `section, .section` with a gradient that gives a sense of strips — e.g., use a repeating-linear-gradient background for section/section? That's a clever way: apply a background gradient to body or to sections that creates horizontal strip patterns without new selectors. But "alternating background colors per strip" is hard with a fixed number of sections.

Alternatively, I can use `:root` variables to define a palette. Then apply gradient-rich backgrounds:
- body gets a gradient background
- section/.section get alternating backgrounds via a single background using `background: linear-gradient(...)` — but all sections would get the same. 

Hmm. Another option: Use `section:nth-child` requires new selectors. The instructions for the target style say "Layout pattern (Aggressive only)" and "Color palette: Alternating white / cream / dark / white pattern". Since we're in conservative mode, we adapt: we can add a few new selectors? Let me re-read the system prompt.

"⚠️ Previous attempt didn't change enough. Make colors, shadows, and radius MORE distinct this round. Use a fresh palette."

"📤 OUTPUT: ONLY the rewritten CSS, preserving ALL selectors and layout exactly"

I think the core requirement is: don't drop/rename/restructure selectors; don't change layout. Adding extra visual rules for specific section types is still within "visual identity refresh". Many such tasks actually expect adding selectors for the target style. The request explicitly says "This file's specific values (column counts, gaps, hex codes, shadow specs) MUST differ" from other files. So I should produce distinctly different values.

Given the target style "horizontal-strips" with "gradient-rich", I'll:
- Keep all original selectors.
- Possibly add a few enhanced selectors like `section:nth-child(...)`? Actually I'd rather incorporate alternating strip backgrounds by using direct element selectors that exist. But the original CSS doesn't enumerate section types beyond .hero, .cta-section, etc. It has section, .section generic. To make horizontal strips, I can:
  - Add `section { background: ... }` with a gradient.
  - Add `.hero { background: ... }`, `.cta-section { background: ... }`.
  - Use `:root` variables to define multiple background variables --bg-strip-1..4.
  - Add new rules like `section:nth-of-type(odd)`? That WOULD be adding a selector. Given the "Aggressive only" tag, maybe the expectation is we don't fully implement horizontal-strips layout because it's aggressive. We just apply a fresh palette and gradient-rich effects. But the user prompt says "🎨 TARGET STYLE: horizontal-strips" and "Layout pattern (Aggressive only)" — meaning the layout pattern is aggressive and thus not fully applied; we use it as an inspiration for visual identity: alternating strip backgrounds, strong color zones, gradient-rich. Since HTML is fixed, we can't change sections.

Actually wait: the target style says "Layout pattern (Aggressive only): Full-width sections (width: 100%), Each strip with distinct padding (60-100px vertical), Alternating background colors per strip". The phrase "(Aggressive only)" might mean this layout pattern is only for aggressive mode, and since we're in conservative mode, we don't alter layout. So the color palette is what we take: white/cream/dark/white alternating, strong color zones. We can apply alternating backgrounds via gradients on the elements we have.

Let me think about concrete implementation:

Palette:
- Deep ink/dark: #101828 (dark strip background)
- Cream: #FDFBF7 or #FAF6EF
- White: #FFFFFF
- Strong color zones: a vivid orange/terracotta or teal? The instruction says other files already used "centered-stage+sharp-edges" — I don't know those values, but I need to differ. Let me pick a palette distinct from the original rose. Let's go with:
  - Primary: deep teal or indigo? Horizontal strips with cream/dark/white suggests an editorial look. I'll use:
    - --color-primary: #0F766E (teal-700)
    - --color-primary-dark: #115E59 (teal-800)
    - --color-accent: #F59E0B (amber-500) or #EA580C (orange-600)
    - --color-surface: #FEF9ED (cream)
    - --color-text: #1A1A1A? or #292524 (stone-800)
    - rgb equivalents.

But wait — "horizontal-strips" + "gradient-rich" with strong color zones. Let me use a combination of deep indigo + warm amber + cream. That gives a nice editorial "strips" feel.

Alternatively: 
- Primary: #4338CA (indigo-700)
- Primary-dark: #3730A3 (indigo-800)
- Accent: #F97316 (orange-500)
- Surface: #FFFBEB (cream)
- Text: #1C1917

Shadow colors: rgba with indigo/orange.

Gradient-rich:
- body background: linear-gradient(180deg, #fff 0%, #FFFBEB 50%, #fff 100%)? Or a repeating gradient for strips.
- section: background: linear-gradient(180deg, rgba(255,255,255,0) 0%, rgba(255,251,235,.4) 100%)? Hmm.

I want to create horizontal strip effects. Since section, .section is generic, I could give it a background that alternates via nth-child. But let me first decide whether to add nth-child selectors. The output requirement: "ONLY the rewritten CSS, preserving ALL selectors and layout exactly". It doesn't say "do not add". And self-check says "Every selector character-for-character preserved?" — that implies all existing selectors remain intact. I think adding a few new selectors for visual enhancement is acceptable and probably expected to achieve the target style. The "NEVER CHANGE" list says "Selector lists (commas)" — keep exact means don't merge/drop selectors from a list. It doesn't forbid adding new rules. Many previous tasks in this genre (CSS variant engine) do add selectors.

Hmm, but to be safe, I'll mostly stick to existing selectors and only add a couple of new ones explicitly for the strip backgrounds (e.g., `section.hero`, `.cta-section` already exist; `section:nth-child` isn't needed if I apply strip backgrounds to known section containers). Actually the known section classes in the file: .news-grid, .feature-list, .hero, .testimonial-list, .partner-grid, .faq-wrapper, .stats-grid, .cta-section, .page-main, .hero-inner, .faq-list, .cta-inner. I can apply backgrounds to each to create horizontal strips. That's a nice approach: each section type gets a distinct strip background (white, cream, dark, white pattern). This fits "horizontal strips" while using existing selectors (some are in the media queries but I can add new rules for them in the base section).

Wait, the original CSS has .hero-inner, .faq-list, .cta-inner only inside media queries. I can add base rules for them? Adding a new rule for .hero-inner is a new selector but it exists in the file already (in a media query). I could use it. Adding a rule outside the media query changes its layout? No, only if I set layout properties. I'll only set background etc.

To be conservative, I'll add a small "Strip backgrounds" section that targets `section, .section`, `.hero`, `.cta-section`, `.stats-grid`, `.faq-wrapper`, `.partner-grid`, `.testimonial-list`, `.news-grid`, `.feature-list` etc. — but many already have rules; I can add background/gradient rules to them. Hmm, but the output requirement says preserve ALL selectors exactly — as long as the original selectors and their properties are there, I can append props. That's fine.

Let me design the visual:

Color palette (to differ from rose):
- Primary: #4F46E5 (indigo-600) — strong color zone? Or teal #0D9488. Let's pick something distinctive: deep indigo #312E81? Hmm. "horizontal-strips" often uses vibrant bands. Let's do:
  - --color-primary: #B45309 (amber-700)? That might be too brown.
  
Alternative: use a striking "editorial" palette: deep pine green #0F766E with warm amber #D97706 and cream #FEF3C7. That's nice and different from rose. Let's go with:
- --color-primary: #0F766