When I set up my planes, I use the rationale that within the mfr's suggested range for the cg, the actual placement of the cg determines how EFFECTIVE the elevator will be, rather than determines whether the plane will be docile or squirrelly. A forward cg will make the elevator less effective, and a rearward cg will make it more effective (thus requiring less elevator throw to achieve the same reaction). If you have a plane flying well at the mfr's farthest forward suggested cg point, you can move the cg back to the mfr's rearward suggested cg point and also DECREASE the elevator throw, and not notice ANY difference in flight characteristics. The key is understanding that a forward cg makes the elevator less effective thus requiring more movement, while moving the cg back makes the elevator more effective, thus requiring less movement to do the same thing. One place where you will notice a differences might be in landing speed. The forward cg tries to drop the nose, and since the plane has a tendency to go downhill, it's harder to get it to slow down for a landing. As the speed decreases, the already less effective elevator becomes even LESS effective in flaring, and the plane is said to land hot. A rearward cg doesn't tend to fly downhill so much, thus making the speed much easier to control in landings (better "brakes".

To sum up, the cg doesn't make the plane more snappy, TOO MUCH ELEVATOR THROW does. The more rearward the cg, the LESS throw is required. I set mine up to use as LITTLE throw as possible, consistent with clean snap roll and spin entries. This way, it snaps when I want it to, rather than when IT wants to.