I like illuminated mil-dot reticles. Even on the cheap scopes. The first thing I look for is the lowest intensity. If you can see it lit on the lowest setting in normal light, it may be too bright. Also I prefer the green light. The red tends to be slightly fuzzy to my eye. The real challenge is not to make the shot in poor light, it's to be absolutely sure what you're shooting at. Also, in Texas there is a legal limit (for protected game) on morning and evening shooting times. The lighted reticle allows you to make a precisely aimed shot in light that is low enough to sometimes make absolute target identification questionable. Example, even a clear silhouette, or a part of a silhouette. You may be able to positively identify a deer for instance, but not a buck or a doe. Unless you have something else to go on, the lighted reticle is no help, because you just can't take the shot. It's also harder to be sure what's behind the target, (there might be another animal back there in the dark) and you have to know. I've passed shots with my .338 x .378 because I wasn't sure that I had dirt to stop the bullet. Thick cover is not enough.
All that said, when you can take the shot, you can confidently place the bullet and not have to estimate where the center of a reticle that disappeared might be.
Boy, that's a long answer to a short question. Also, just my opinion. Tom
Texas State Rifle Association Life Member
NRA Endowment Life Member
A big fast bullet will beat a little fast bullet every time