[Touch of Reality Mode]
(A) Haven't DL'd it (the audio system is busy at the moment). But I can safely say that no one can really make any valid recommendations without hearing the mix first -- Especially after the rather long list of processing.
(B) If the mix doesn't sound 95% "there" in the first place, it's probably not going to happen. Mastering is a "tailoring" process -- Not a "rebuilding" process. When you buy a suit, you find one that fits pretty well in the first place. Then the tailor comes and makes some precise measurements to make it fit perfectly.
Dump the maul-the-band compressor (used SO rarely in mastering that it still blows my mind that everyone markets them as "mastering processors"), dump the stereo spreader -- "Space" and "depth" in a mix come from SPACE and DEPTH at the TRACKING phase -- It can be enhanced somewhat - It can be manipulated somewhat - but it has to be there. You can pan stuff all over the place -- If everything was recorded a foot from the source, the image will be a foot deep and flat. You can add all sorts of reverb to it also - But the signal isn't the same as what the mic will hear utilizing (again) space and depth.
Without trying to sound discouraging -- The (VAST) majority of the "home brew" (for lack of a better term) that comes in here simply doesn't have the potential to sound like the stuff on the shelves. Comparing these recordings to recordings made by teams of industry professionals with aggregate decades of experience working in wonderfully equipped and acoustically reasonable spaces, with every core sound painstakingly cared for at every possible phase in the process --
That said, I haven't heard it - It might be one of those rare exceptions. THAT said, if it is, simply listen to the mix and do what it's asking you to do. THAT said, if it's asking for maul-the-band compression and stereo spread manipulation, send it back to the mix guy and have him fix the problems there where it'll actually be somewhat effective.