Small Tankers: strangely unsinkable

[Keelbuster]

In all the versions of this game that i can remember (modded, unmodded) - the small tanker is strangely difficult to sink. Medium and Large tankers (previously T2 and T3) are comparatively easy to sink. You'd think that based on the amount of torpex that you put into the bastard compared to her size, small tankers would have the least chance of survival. But they're the most resilient. It's annoying. The same seems to hold for small ships like the small merchant and particularly the tramp steamer. While Large and even medium cargos sink with a single torp, this is much less likely to happen with the smaller ships. It seems intuitively correct that a 2000 ton tramp steamer or a 4000 ton small tanker would be _devastated_ by a torpedo hit. Yet these ships remain the most difficult to sink (aside from medium or large warships and liberty cargos).

Anybody else irked by this? If you were to hit a small tanker with one torp and hope to sink her, where would you aim? I've tried bow, mid, and stern with no avail. I've even put two torps into a small tanker and had her sail on. With a Large Tanker, a medium tanker, a large cargo, or a medium cargo, a good hit to the bow or stern brings her down quite often (though i usually give them two because they deserve it). I can't remember a single torp taking out a small tanker...ever?

[JCB]

I will not pretend I know anything about this game or merchant construction, but from building sailboats I know this: Smaller is stronger! One example is the mast. The stresses of the mast increase by a factor of four with increase in length, making shorter masts less reliant on strong supports. A big merchant and a small merchant both have the same parts, like keels, ribs, skin and so on, but I don´t think the dimensions of the bigger merchant follow the rule of strenght - for example making the ship skin much thicker to have the same relative strenght of the smaller merchant. I know through experience that the short, simple gaff-rigged mast more often than not will outlast modern hightech carbon masts if subjected to stresses they are not designed for. Smaller is in many regards more robust. I suppose a torp under the keel is not in the design description for the merchants either

[melnibonian]

From personal experience I think that if you hit the small tanker with one torpedo set at 1m running depth just in front of the engine room (towards the aft part of the ship) it will blow to pieces. As far as GWX is concerned because of the probability factors associated with each torpedo hit you might not see an instant kill every time but you will sink them in the end 9 times out of 10. Another important factor is the angle at which the torpedo hit. If the angle is close to 90deg you're maximising your chances for a good and devastating kill.

[KeptinCranky]

Also, with the small tanker in particular, it has a very rounded hull shape and very little vertical side below the waterline, which makes it harder to hit succesfully with an impact shot, I'd second Mel's advice on how to sink them, except in rough weather where you'lll probably be better of using a magnetic eel

[Jimbuna]

I can't say I haven't noticed what your saying on the odd occasion. What I tend to do is hit them in the engine room so if they don't sink, they eventually fall out of formation and come to a stop, then finish them off with the deck gun

[Fusek]

Is there a difference (in GWX@) in empty and full tankers?

[Keelbuster]

Originally Posted by KeptinCranky

Also, with the small tanker in particular, it has a very rounded hull shape and very little vertical side below the waterline, which makes it harder to hit succesfully with an impact shot, I'd second Mel's advice on how to sink them, except in rough weather where you'lll probably be better of using a magnetic eel

I've noticed that - that they have a shallow draft and a rounded hull so it's risky to try for the keelbuster. I always set 2 or 3m with these guys. And yea, I usually end up deckgunning them. They look like such bite-sized food, but they end up being barely worth it in my mind. Also, they're so short in length that it's often hard to hit them in a desired spot. I usually have to aim for the center and calculation error brings the hit in front or behind that spot.

[Keelbuster]

Originally Posted by JCB

I will not pretend I know anything about this game or merchant construction, but from building sailboats I know this: Smaller is stronger! One example is the mast. The stresses of the mast increase by a factor of four with increase in length, making shorter masts less reliant on strong supports. A big merchant and a small merchant both have the same parts, like keels, ribs, skin and so on, but I don´t think the dimensions of the bigger merchant follow the rule of strenght - for example making the ship skin much thicker to have the same relative strenght of the smaller merchant. I know through experience that the short, simple gaff-rigged mast more often than not will outlast modern hightech carbon masts if subjected to stresses they are not designed for. Smaller is in many regards more robust. I suppose a torp under the keel is not in the design description for the merchants either

This does make some sense. I wondered about that - if it was intentional. But in terms of compartments, you'd think that a torp hit would have a higher chance of compromising more than one compartment in a smaller ship, and hence cause terminal damage. It seems that with small tankers, there's no one compartment that when destroyed, will cause sinking. With larger ships, destruction of the bow or stern compartment usually brings her down.

[Schwartzkat3x]

Same problems here, I try to set the deck gun on waterline and move within 800 so I can use the flak gun on them too. in rough water the small tankers are barely worth it unless you are 1000m with a perfect angle.