Not sure how 600 pts of damage for a single shot is weak. That is enough to kill anything.
But by real gripe is with the sneak attack, not really the Sniper Rifle. All the damage multiples, so the damage becomes over the top.
you're saying it yourself, it's the sneak attack bonus, not the sniper rifle.
and i think i've made myself clear: i've built my character to be a proficient sniper, this means my decisions in terms of perks, traits and SPECIAL were made to have a high base critical hit value.
and before the patch, that worked out pretty well. i evolved from ratslayer to gobi, and thanks to my character design decisions that earned me a crit chance of 90%, WITHOUT having to resort to sneak attacks!
now some 'clever' person at obisidian decided to "balance things out", and just lowered my critical hit chance from 90 to 18%, making my whole character design inefficient.
sorry, but that just stinks!
i'm not complaining about a general re-balancing of the sniper rifle. i'm ok with the reduction of the overall damage as it is . i also think the 1.5x DAM for JSPs is way too much, 1.2 or 1.25 should be more appropriate.
but taking away the critical multiplier is short-sighted, to say it in a very diplomatic manner.
THAT singlehandedly made the whole sniperpath pointless. because, as we all know, sneak criticals can be achieved with any type of character. going for a maximum DAM output is now clearly the only viable solution in combat issues.
in case of the sniper rifle, i would have done it the following way. reduce the base DAM even a bit more to 30 or 35 or so. set the crit DAM bonus to about 50, and the crit multiplier to x3 or x3.5.
that way, the sniper rifle would be a very powerful tool in the hands of those who were willing to invest into the right abilites, without being the infamous all-purpose combat rifle for everyone, it admittedly could be abused to before the patch.
my plea to the developers for future patches is: please, please spend some thought on your decisions and the possible consequences. it's clear you have not in that particular case here.