Last spring when we first caught a glimpse of the new card for the 10th Regiment of Foot, many players were very quick to proclaim that the 10th were clearly better than the 4th Massachusetts line. I argued very passionately against this line of thinking, to the point of people thinking I had some kind of man-crush on the yankees.
But I hardly like the 4th Mass at all. I just know BS when I see it. I'm going to list some of the old arguments and why I disagree with them, as well as the most important one that usually goes unspoken for some reason.
1) They gain more benefits from synergy.
This isn't true. They're both soldiers, so they can get the benefits from Marcus. You can just as easily put Raelin, Q9, or Rats in an army with the 4th as with the 10th. The 10th don't actually gain anything from being in an all disciplined army, and when you put Sacred Band in the same force, you quickly run out of starting spaces. Sir Gilbert can help move the 4th Mass, while the 10th only have the option of Marcus, which the 4th also have. Even in a very similar build, the 4th still cost 5 points less per squad.
2)They're more flexible.
Many players seem to have this mistaken belief that when you play the 4th Mass, you're sitting around and using Wait then Fire every turn. All you need to do is 'outrange' them and you win. Sure, it can be advantageous to force the 4th to come to you with a really long range attack, but the same thing is true of the 10th. Most of the time, you're probably better off staying on high ground and firing from max range with either squad. Sometimes when people talk about flexibility, they're talking about drafting options, but as I already said, they get the same synergy benefits, with the 4th having the option of going full valiant for something that the 10th just can't compare with.
3)The 10th are just as good, if not strictly better than the 4th when facing a full melee army.
This one is actually true. I saw a pretty nasty game recently in KC, MO. deliverymanxas was playing 10th Regiment of Foot, Raelin, and Marcus against Matthias' Knights of Weston with no ranged support. It was a slaughter. If Ken's Kenights ever even made it to the 10th, they'd be rolling 3v5 anyway, which is a pretty unfavorable roll.
But there's just one problem: most people don't play all melee. The metagame is still pretty ranged-heavy, and in that case either the 4th Mass' Valiant bonus is better than being leashed to Raelin's Aura, or even in a mixed A+ junk army, you'll still save 5 points/squad by going with the Mass and you won't use the 10th's bonuses that often anyway. In the example I gave above from a 530 point tournament, D-man played 4x 10th, Raelin, Marcus, and Marro Warriors. Had he gone with the 4th Mass, he could have gone 5x Mass, Marcus, Raelin. Either army would have beaten the Knights, and the second might have fared better in other matchups.
When I think of bringing the (Valiant) 4th Mass to a tournament, I think about their main likely matchups.
1) They're favored against a Glads/Blasts army.
2) They're favored against most Stinger-podges.
3) They have a 50/50 chance against most Rat/Uniques armies, especially if they only have 2x Rats. Also, I don't see these too often in my area.
4) They're in trouble against Q9 in the hands of a capable player.
5) They're favored against most melee armies, even Knights.
6) They'll do well against less competitive armies.
If I were to make a similar breakdown for the 10th, I think almost all of the matchups except number 5 and maybe 6 would get slightly worse, and number 4 would get much, much worse. A 10th centric army doesn't have a chance against Q9. Against other ranged armies, that drop from 3 to 2 defense really makes a difference.
Now, you're probably just thinking, "Well, the 10th aren't as good at being the 4th Mass as the 4th Mass are, but that's no big deal. The 10th are still better when you're playing a hodge-podge army with a special attacker, Raelin, and Rats."
At that point, without Marcus, you might as well just play Stingers. That'll even out your match ups nicely, and give you a shot against Q9 and Nilfheim. Or grab the Krav and Marro Warriors for the cost of 2 squads, which is what I'd do whenever I'm planning to field 3 or less of a ranged common.
Don't get me wrong. The 10th are quite good. I just think they're the 4th best ranged common in the game (behind the Mass, Stingers, and Trons). Do you want to settle for 4th best?
(Note: I'm not expecting this to be taken as the gospel of Heroscape. I'd like to hear some convincing arguments for using the 10th over the Mass or Stingers, and what sorts of matchups you'd want them).
But I hardly like the 4th Mass at all. I just know BS when I see it. I'm going to list some of the old arguments and why I disagree with them, as well as the most important one that usually goes unspoken for some reason.
1) They gain more benefits from synergy.
This isn't true. They're both soldiers, so they can get the benefits from Marcus. You can just as easily put Raelin, Q9, or Rats in an army with the 4th as with the 10th. The 10th don't actually gain anything from being in an all disciplined army, and when you put Sacred Band in the same force, you quickly run out of starting spaces. Sir Gilbert can help move the 4th Mass, while the 10th only have the option of Marcus, which the 4th also have. Even in a very similar build, the 4th still cost 5 points less per squad.
2)They're more flexible.
Many players seem to have this mistaken belief that when you play the 4th Mass, you're sitting around and using Wait then Fire every turn. All you need to do is 'outrange' them and you win. Sure, it can be advantageous to force the 4th to come to you with a really long range attack, but the same thing is true of the 10th. Most of the time, you're probably better off staying on high ground and firing from max range with either squad. Sometimes when people talk about flexibility, they're talking about drafting options, but as I already said, they get the same synergy benefits, with the 4th having the option of going full valiant for something that the 10th just can't compare with.
3)The 10th are just as good, if not strictly better than the 4th when facing a full melee army.
This one is actually true. I saw a pretty nasty game recently in KC, MO. deliverymanxas was playing 10th Regiment of Foot, Raelin, and Marcus against Matthias' Knights of Weston with no ranged support. It was a slaughter. If Ken's Kenights ever even made it to the 10th, they'd be rolling 3v5 anyway, which is a pretty unfavorable roll.
But there's just one problem: most people don't play all melee. The metagame is still pretty ranged-heavy, and in that case either the 4th Mass' Valiant bonus is better than being leashed to Raelin's Aura, or even in a mixed A+ junk army, you'll still save 5 points/squad by going with the Mass and you won't use the 10th's bonuses that often anyway. In the example I gave above from a 530 point tournament, D-man played 4x 10th, Raelin, Marcus, and Marro Warriors. Had he gone with the 4th Mass, he could have gone 5x Mass, Marcus, Raelin. Either army would have beaten the Knights, and the second might have fared better in other matchups.
When I think of bringing the (Valiant) 4th Mass to a tournament, I think about their main likely matchups.
1) They're favored against a Glads/Blasts army.
2) They're favored against most Stinger-podges.
3) They have a 50/50 chance against most Rat/Uniques armies, especially if they only have 2x Rats. Also, I don't see these too often in my area.
4) They're in trouble against Q9 in the hands of a capable player.
5) They're favored against most melee armies, even Knights.
6) They'll do well against less competitive armies.
If I were to make a similar breakdown for the 10th, I think almost all of the matchups except number 5 and maybe 6 would get slightly worse, and number 4 would get much, much worse. A 10th centric army doesn't have a chance against Q9. Against other ranged armies, that drop from 3 to 2 defense really makes a difference.
Now, you're probably just thinking, "Well, the 10th aren't as good at being the 4th Mass as the 4th Mass are, but that's no big deal. The 10th are still better when you're playing a hodge-podge army with a special attacker, Raelin, and Rats."
At that point, without Marcus, you might as well just play Stingers. That'll even out your match ups nicely, and give you a shot against Q9 and Nilfheim. Or grab the Krav and Marro Warriors for the cost of 2 squads, which is what I'd do whenever I'm planning to field 3 or less of a ranged common.
Don't get me wrong. The 10th are quite good. I just think they're the 4th best ranged common in the game (behind the Mass, Stingers, and Trons). Do you want to settle for 4th best?
(Note: I'm not expecting this to be taken as the gospel of Heroscape. I'd like to hear some convincing arguments for using the 10th over the Mass or Stingers, and what sorts of matchups you'd want them).
