Again i though about how startlocations would be best positioned for a good team map. The far bases were connected via island at first, but i thought that 2 p could doubleteam a terran to easy with 2 entrances so i made it a bit more classical.

Interesting map. However, concerning fair startlocations I think 12 and 6 are too far apart. In 2on2, a team on 3-9 could easily rush e.g. 12. This sounds similar to the problem on LT with the guy on the 9 o' clock position.
Do all the gas expos have the same amount of gas?

is this map ment to be pure 2v2 or 1v1 aswell?

in the other case zerg might have trouble on the close start pos especially vs t.

In 1on1, close positions are much too close. This would be pure 2on2 map. I like it, it is very much like LT though.

I wanted a bit more of a battlefield than LT has, i also wanted it to be more team played than LT. It is obvious that close bases will be the best team start pos, but i think it will work other way too. Obviously the greatest fights will be over the dual cliffs.

You should remove some of the walls in the middle, it seems too hard to pass.

I don't really like this map for 1v1 because of the huge cliffs. If you spawned at certain locations, you could contain your opponent from high ground and pound on their expo. I don't like insane positional differences like that.

But it is made for the 2on2 contest :P

yeah but that's kind of lame... I think maps should be playable in any form

When the map has its special intention i dont think it matters. hehe see that RoV or bifrost cant be played 2v2 :D
then i think its just fair that this map was 2on2 meant :D

This map reminds me of the WC3 Map, Lost Temple.
Great work Star.

thats quite a good observation.. now when you say it i know exactly what you mean.. hehe funny. it was not the intention at all.. i even made another map to try and mimic war3 lt, but this unintentionally seemed to be even closer..

i think that some maps are really good...nice work!

uh oh.. ok. thanks :P