for a server is it better to masquerade or use SNAT if you have multiple statics through a single ISP?

Question

So lets say you have a range of public static IPs from a single ISP, lets call these x.x.x.a through x.x.x.z. Now you have a bunch of users and servers in different /24 vlans, but all can be summerized as 10.10.0.0/16. So you create a MASQ rule that 10.10.0.0/16 uses x.x.x.a. Now you have some servers, for example, 10.10.1.20 that you DNAT port 443 from x.x.x.b, and 10.10.2.30 that you DNAT some random app ports for x.x.x.c. When those servers connect to things externally you want the sources to not show be x.x.x.a, but x.x.x.b, and x.x.x.c respectively. 
 Should MASQ rules be created for each server, or rather SNAT? Surely not Full NAT, right?

BAlfson · Accepted Answer

Sometime over the last few years, Sophos added the ability to do this with masquerading. They did this by making the list of masq rules an ordered list. Just like all ordered lists in the UTM, when traffic qualifies for a rule, no further rules in the list are considered. 
 You can do it either way but I think it makes for a more-elegant configuration to do it with Masquerading. 
 Cheers - Bob