Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-04 from 431 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
This analysis describes version 1.36.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.36.1, updated 2026-09-01.
What the analysis found
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
Absolutely misleading ads. No ads in game? Hahahahaha. Free to play? Only if you like pain and frustration. Garbage game, do not download and play.
Your commercial said to give you 5 seconds and you took a 1 minute and 10 seconds. That's false advertising.
I tried it for the ad experience because it required quick math in a game format, but it's nothing like the ads, only like the images here. disappointed. if it had the ad experience as a game mode I had the option to solely play, I would…
Aggressive ad load
Been playing the game since it's infancy. While there are forced ads and pop up offers, the strategy and gameplay is unmatched. I've never spent a single dollar on the game and I've still been able to progress very far and still haven't…
February 2026 update. The game is fun! I do have to give a shout out to the devs for actually getting problems fixed. The game is still coming out with new stuff, some great, some not as great. Easy game to put down and pick back up when…
Very grindy, not a large player base for the clan content, and with the most recent forced ads on top of all of the optional ones, the game is nearly unplayable. -edit for the devs comment. I don't mind the grind, it's part of the appeal…
Pay to progress
Most of the resources are very slow to get. It's very pay to win with many of the packs costing way more than I'm willing to pay for a game I mostly play, while Idle. It would be a much better game if resources were more readily…
Very pay-to-win. Progression is painfully slow unless you spend money, and the game clearly favors paying players. Free-to-play players are left behind and the grind becomes frustrating instead of fun. I only play it when I'm bored, but…
Has a lot of p2w pop ups which is the main reason I decided not to continue playing. Campaign does get significantly harder very quickly and the in app purchases are mostly preyty cheap but there are a LOT of them. This is a numbers game…
What this app sells
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.