Re: switch from MOA to MIL
This topic has been beat to death on this forum so you should be able to find some lengthy discussions by searching LRH. I personally use both but prefer MIL. I started with MOA so the transition was as you described.
A few of the reasons I like MIL
1. If you plan to use the reticle, a 1/2 MIL reticle is about 1.8 MOA, so just a bit finer than the popular 2 MOA reticles. To me this is about the perfect balance of usability without getting too cluttered.
2. For big game MIL is about the perfect coarseness for turret correction out to 1000 yards and under.
3. Smaller numbers and fewer rotations of the turrets typically means less chance for mistakes.
4. For most situations I like FFP scopes for big game hunting (I mainly shoot under 1/2 mile) and I like using the reticle for holdovers, windage, and calling shots. Many manufacturers offer better reticles in MIL IMO.
A couple things to keep in mind. MOA and MIL are both angular measurements so if someone is doing a lot of math with either one they are using the reticle incorrectly, or at least inefficiently. With today's technology there is almost zero reason to get all caught up in the math of it all IMO. Ranging with a reticle on big games animals is very tough to do much past 400-500 yards IMO in part because the size of the animal can vary so much so there is no standard of measurement which is a requirement for any reticle ranging. And with today's fast, flat cartridges, most of us are PBR out close to those distances anyway.
Like many have said here it is personal preference and I think anyone, with a little time, could become very proficient with either.