Not trying to agree or disagree or anything but I would like to point out a few things. Food for thought, thats all. Anyway, IB and SC were not affected by tank stance damage reduction. War also had Unchained to remove that reduction as well. Both of these things are obviously pointless as tank stance has changed now. Correct me if I'm wrong but I dont remeber the other tanks having that beneficial stipulation on their moves. So collectively all those other moves on the tanks gained a boon while IB and SC didn't. Also after a fashion Unchained could be considered a buff to damage that was never compensated for. Granted this is subjective as it assumes you bothered to stay in tank stance which I know most didn't bother to do. Considering both gave hp back and IB also offered 20% damage reduction those moves lost both in CD effects and damaged due to the collective boon given to every other ability. While you can argue that RI and NF can make up for that fact, you don't get RI till 56 or NF till 76 while IB is 35. Also considering both are lost in HW content, the relevance of the moves only consists of lower, specifically ARR, content. So to what purpose does bringing up endgame and raid numbers bring to the discussion? This affects synced content not endgame. With that, wouldn't it be more comparable to GNB's Burst Strike that has a 500 potency and only requires one combo to generate a cartrage for? Maybe not, I'm not going to crunch massive numbers to try and figure out ARR tank comparable potencies. That's too much work for content that can be unsynced anyway. Who knows maybe it isn't a loss in comparison, I'm not bothering to figure it out. So I'm not going to agree or disagree if it needs a buff or not. It's just something to think about.