To expand on a couple of your questions a little more...
1) Shooting a ladder test at increased distance simply stretches out the y-axis in terms of vertical dispersion (i.e. vertical distance between between holes) and may allow you to get a little better feedback from shots that were clustered close together vertically at a shorter distance. The caveat is that you will generally see more horizontal displacement if there is much wind at all. Because you're primarily interested in vertical when doing a ladder test, increased horizontal is usually only a problem if it comes along with increased vertical dispersion due to the topography of the range. Vertical dispersion can also be induced by wind traveling over berms or other terrain features of the range, which can make it harder to interpret the ladder solely based on charge weight. Obviously, it is most desirable to carry out such tests in minimal or no-wind conditions, but we don't always have that option. The predominant wind conditions and topography at your range need to be factored in when deciding what distance to shoot your ladder tests.
2) Because a ladder test typically requires far fewer rounds than group-based tests such as the Optimal Charge Weight (OCW) approach, it is a good practice to load up at least two or three identical ladders and fire them all on separate targets. That way, if any of the individual shots on a single targets exhibited anomalous vertical behavior, there is a chance one of your other targets may reveal it.
3) If we were to test a very wide range of charge weights in small increments using the ladder approach, it would be expected that we would see several charge weight nodes with two or more shots clustered together vertically for each. For reasons of time, effort, cost of reloading components, etc., we typically start with a somewhat narrower charge weight range based on information obtained from reloading manuals, shooting forums, etc. In other words, we start out already having some idea of an appropriate charge weight range to test. More often than not, this charge weight range will be focused in on the middle-ish to upper (max pressure) region, because we usually have a much better idea where max pressure will be on the charge weight curve, and because testing cases less than half to two-thirds full of powder can create other undesirable issues.
Although vertical nodes identified at the lower end of a test range can provide good precision, in my hands it is those nodes that fall a little higher in the charge weight range that seem to be the most consistent, and are at the point where you're not giving up several hundred feet per second velocity (performance). Of course, velocity isn't everything...I'd absolutely pick a slightly slower node for better precision any day. Nonetheless, I find my best loads will usually have a case fill ratio for a given powder somewhere between 93-95% and 101-105%, that yield predicted pressures safely below max pressure, but toward the higher end. Presumably, it is these conditions that provide the most optimal and uniform combustion for a given cartridge/bullet combination. The bottom line is that the targets will tell you where the optimal charge weight needs to be, whether that be at a lower relative charge weight or higher. This statement is perhaps a little oversimplified, but only when you see two (or possibly more) distinct minimal vertical dispersion nodes on a ladder test, one at a lower charge weight, and one at a higher charge weight, will you need to somehow distinguish between them. In that event, it is often useful to continue load development with charge weights centered in both regions and determine empirically from further testing whether one charge weight is a little better than the other, especially at the distance you intend to compete.
The good news is that the more you do these types of test, the better you will become at interpreting what the targets tell you. Like anything else, you gain experience the more you do something. Best of luck with your load development!