If the reticle is used for holdover, dont you find the dot may be a little too thick some times?
Can't say that I have ever found a FFP mildot reticle to be too large. At its thickest point, the mil-dot is 0.2 mrad = 20 cm @ 1000 m or 8" @ 1100yd and I've never shot at a target as small or smaller than that, nor do I realistically see the need to. If I can see at least a part of the target behind the reticle or dot, I can aim at it. "Aim small, hit small" doesn't mean you need to have a hair thin reticle and large magnification. It means you're more accurate on a well defined, small aiming point for a target
. Just try to group accurately at 40x when your target is a large grey blob and you can't see your impacts. Now try the same, but on a black diamond shape on white background, with mere 10x of magnification. I will guarantee you the latter will be easier.
In my use the dots are only to give a rough estimate of impact anyway. As in, whether the round was 0.3 or 0.7 mrad off ==> I can make reasonably accurate corrections quickly. Anything requiring more precision, I'm twisting the turrets.
Naturally, YMMV, but this is my personal experience. The only thing in my opinion a mildot reticle is lacking is those 0.5 mrad hash marks.