Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 1,888 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.
App Store
This analysis describes version 0.48.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 0.48.1, updated 2026-09-23.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 0.48.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 0.48.1, updated 2026-09-22.
What the analysis found
The catch list 2
Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.
Context 1
Measured and published because a reader would want to know — deliberately not a charge. The measurement alone does not show a harm.
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 2
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
game is nothing like the ad and then they release a new ad which is just ai woman getting wet
game play didn't match the ad. so false advertising gave me a boring game that wasn't what I tried to download
misleading ads. waste of time. not fun.
Pay to progress
a pay to win game with lots of whales. oh, and good luck trying to contact "support"
Game is just getting pay to win more and more every patch. Oh your tataris is doing well in Horde? Let's us nerf all of them and buff random tataris. And make Horde a bit harder because why not? People are definitely not having a hard…
This game didn't change. It's not fair play because players who top up more can win tournaments and events. This is more pay-to-win!
Aggressive ad load
what I like, various challenges, collecting monsters, team work, decorating the base. What I don't like, pop up adds, increasing costs if you make a purchase, no way to replace inactives. what I would like to see, monster breeding for…
If you love seeing 4000 ads to buy some special promo of this or that every time you open a game, then this is the game for you! I can't believe this is a successful game mechanic these days, we're cooked.
09/28 the card collecting event is still badly designed and not for F2P. -1 Played for over a month. You will see their Ads/premium packages every single time you play. The game makes being F2P or low funding a big chore with very little…
Upgrade prompts use guilt-trip wording
really fun game, i have about 100+ hours in it and ongoing for now. however it does constantly shove popups in my face to buy things everytime I open the app, i understand the game needs funding but its just super annoying and obnoxious…
It is an exceptionally money grubby game that constantly shoves popups in your face for you to buy something. The gameplay is PVP centric, repetitive, and designed for you to get hooked and feel the "need" to spend real dosh to "keep up"…
Love the game but the amount of pop ups to try to get you to pay to win is annoying but asides that 👍🏿
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
Show 1 more purchase we couldn’t categorise
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
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.