We analyzed this app across 4 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version [8.0.109] 8.0.109 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version [8.0.110] 8.0.110, updated 2026-09-29.
The app has been updated since this analysis. The findings on this page describe version [8.0.109] 8.0.109, not the version now listed on the store.
Release notes for the newer versions, in the developer’s own words:
Version [8.0.110] 8.0.110 · 2026-09-29
No release notes were provided for this version.
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.
Aggressive ad load
I hate when the put it in online mode, and have so many ads appearing
great game, but if you play online, and after 4 or 3 game there are ads every time its so annoying and there's no offline mode i like this game because i like volleyball, but the ads its not. if you have patience even its have ads this is…
too much ads
Pay to progress
Haven't played in a year or so, I played the game was in a sorry pay to win state. Issue now is some genius thought it would be smart for the camera to zoom in on special abilities. Oasis's high noon is a good example. LET ME SEE MY…
Used to be best game now it just pay to win
Reaching league 16, that league feels pay to win, like there's no way i can clear it without a specific S and S+ characters, and even if i had that specific character, there's no way +0 breakthrough would help🤷🏻♂️
What this app sells
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Four independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest — 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.