In the 1960s and 1970s, the Finnish Navy tried to design a new model of a domestic torpedo, a guided electric one, to arm its MGBs/MTBs (the 60s-vintage Nuoli class, particularly). At the same time, the Soviet P-15 Termit anti-ship missile was introduced in the Finnish Navy, domestic coastal launchers were designed for it, and Osa II class missile boats bought from the Soviets to be used as platforms.
By the late 70s, the torpedo project was abandoned, as it was found technically too difficult to design a reliable guidance system with the Finnish resources. The Finns' limited funding for new naval weapons (that are not guns or mines) was directed into developing/fine-tuning the P-15 for particular Finnish needs.The navy's entire torpedo arm was practically abandoned and the anti-ship missile became the navy's major weapon system alongside naval guns and sea mines. In the 80s, the Finns moved from the P-15 to the Swedish RBS-15, and at that point the hands-on experience the Finns had had with the Soviet missiles was very important for being able to introduce the Swedish missiles and customise their systems for Finnish needs. Now, after three decades with the RBS-15, the Finnish Navy will be changing over to the Israeli Gabriels in the 2020s.
The morale of the story, IMO, is that even for a small nation that theoretically could benefit from using MTBs past the 60s (due to resource constraints), it will be smarter to pour your limited resources into adopting an anti-ship missile armament than keep using torpedoes alone, or, the worst of follies, divide your limited funding to try to introduce both a modern torpedo system and an anti-ship missile system. That might lead to you having two sub-par systems neither of which would be up to snuff if you would really need to use them.