Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-04 from 494 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 1.0.66 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.0.66, updated 2026-09-23.
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 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.
Pay to progress
Great game. Easy to play yet incredible detail and depth. Not a war game. No player versus player battles. The competition is in self development and strategy. A bit pay to win but no more than any other game out there today. Completely…
The game itself is ok, and gives you heaps of things to keep busy with if you have time to waste. However, the monetization is insane with screens constantly popping up to get you to buy something or to watch an ad for a tiny reward. It's…
Don't download, don't even start. Yes it is a fun game but it is completely pay to win so people quit very quickly and then you are stuck on a dead server and that's zero fun. The devs apparently have no clue how to solve this issue and…
Aggressive ad load
I wish the mandatory ads in other games would show that these types of games are the same skeleton, different skin! I was looking forward to trying out a game where you can evolve a group of people (like Virtual Villagers), but it's just…
I just started playing a little while ago that so far.I'm really enjoying myself. update, less than 24 hours later. unfortunately, the game starts off with guilds that are far too small. So it ends up being a whole bunch of dead alliances…
Ok, I gave it a go and it is really amazing game. Very addictive, nice looking and keeping me engaged. I would give it 5 stars, but too many adds and most the time at the end of the add game restarts with no reward. Otherwise great game…
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.
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.