ASO AgencyGames · US iPhone listing
Does their ASO suck?
Listing creative score · first three captured iPhone screenshots
5/10Fine. A dangerous place to stop.
Clash of Clans opens with tactical advice before giving newcomers a clear reason to care about their first village. The game systems are visible. The introduction is aimed at someone already halfway through the conversation.
Gab’s verdict · 5/10Gabriel Machuret
One storefront, one language and a dated capture. This is an independent editorial audit, not a client case study.
Gab’s take · Five criteria. Two points each.
The village and battle scenes show real systems. Keep that proof. A new player needs a clearer way into the world before the tiny tactical panel starts issuing homework. The order and scale still make the opening harder than necessary. Lead with building, show one choice and finish with its battle consequence. The tiny tactical panel can move later, once the visitor understands the job.
Expert tactics assume familiarity before explaining the core game.
Village growth and attacks provide genuine system proof.
Small landscape UI and tactical text are difficult to inspect.
Tactics lead before the more understandable village-building premise.
Progression and battles are specific but the newcomer path is incomplete.
0: not earned · 1: useful but incomplete · 2: clearly demonstrated. Judged on the dated opening creative; public metadata provides context. These points assess creative execution, not private conversion or ranking performance. Read the scoring criteria · See all ten verdict levels
Inspect the numbered original, read the problem, then compare the proposed fix. The publisher’s creative stays unchanged.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: A chat-style advice panel sits beside troop and army-management information.
Why I’m flagging it: A chat-style panel and army detail assume category knowledge.
Open with a genuine beginner-level base decision; verify the advice feature's actual role.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The village grows across three illustrated stages under Become chief of a village.
Why I’m flagging it: Three village states compress the progression detail.
Enlarge one upgrade and its meaningful visible change.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The caption explicitly identifies player-versus-player battles.
Why I’m flagging it: The battle scene needs a clearer focal decision.
Show one authentic attack objective without implying typical success or progression speed.
Proposed copy for discussion. These are not current listing fields or tested winners.
Observed listing
Base Building Battle Strategy
Proposed alternative
Build a village. Plan battles.
Name 14/30 · Subtitle 30/30 charactersTranslate category labels into two understandable actions while preserving the brand. It makes the builder-to-battle relationship explicit for someone unfamiliar with the franchise.
The tradeoff: The proposal removes the exact strategy phrase and does not explain clan cooperation. Query relevance and role comprehension need separate evaluation.
Read the sequence from top to bottom on mobile, left to right on desktop. These are message-layout sketches, not screens from Clash of Clans or tested results.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: A verified early village and a later possible development stage.
Why it earns the space: Explain the persistent object of play without attaching a fabricated timetable.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: A current troop-selection screen with a simple tactical choice.
Why it earns the space: Introduce the planning action after the visitor understands the world.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: An authentic possible attack showing how the selected army is used.
Why it earns the space: Close the loop with actual gameplay, not an unrelated cinematic or guaranteed victory.
The test: Does moving the intact village-progression frame before the tactics frame improve newcomer comprehension and download conversion? The sketch gives the designer a direction; the actual product and access conditions decide what can ship.
Bring the listing. I’ll help you decide what to keep, what to fix and what to test.
Observed competitor metadata
PvP Battle in Card Tower Duel
Clash Royale describes a PvP card and tower duel.
The lesson: A familiar visual brand does not make the core loop identical. Clash of Clans should explain persistent village building.
Observed competitor metadata
Epic RTS Base-Building Battles
Boom Beach names war strategy and RTS base-building battles.
The lesson: The closest vocabulary overlaps with building and combat; use an authentic village progression demonstration rather than a generic strategy label.
Observed competitor metadata
Top Civilization Strategy Game
Rise of Kingdoms names civilisation strategy.
The lesson: The fantasy and scale differ. Explain the player’s immediate role before competing on broad strategy language.
Intent candidates grounded in the listing—not fabricated search-volume or difficulty scores.
Visitor’s job: Develop a persistent base over time.
Evidence: The observed subtitle names base building and frame two shows village progression.
Decision: Prioritise this concrete game loop in newcomer research without assuming keyword volume.
Visitor’s job: Choose forces and compete in battles.
Evidence: Battle strategy appears in the subtitle and PvP is explicit in the third frame.
Decision: Separate tactical interest from promises of easy victories or fast progression.
Visitor’s job: Join a social game or resume an established account.
Evidence: Clans appear in the name and dated reviewers discuss family clans and returning play.
Decision: Verify current joining and return flows before making either the lead acquisition promise.
The unseen keyword field may already cover some of these terms. Build an evidence-backed keyword shortlist before making a metadata change.
These three accounts contrast progression expectations, family play and late-game fatigue. They date from 2020 and 2023 and all carry five stars, including a strongly negative account. They are qualitative research leads, not a current sentiment or retention estimate.
Sample: 3 selected accounts from 8 displayed reviews. Dates: 12 October 2020–26 August 2023. No sentiment percentage is calculated.
26 August 2023 · 5/5 stars
“progression is slow”
An August 2023 five-star account liked the game but disputed advertising expectations and upgrade pacing.
What I’d investigate: Check the honesty of progression creative; this is one historical experience, not a measured current pacing problem.
Listing review source · Review ID 103024172174 April 2023 · 5/5 stars
“family clan”
An April 2023 reviewer described playing with relatives, returning after breaks and enjoying the game despite timers.
What I’d investigate: Social continuity is a research lead. Verify the current clan and return experience before making claims.
Listing review source · Review ID 978421321212 October 2020 · 5/5 stars
“My clan was like family”
An October 2020 account described leaving after dissatisfaction with late-game update pacing.
What I’d investigate: Keep its five-star source rating despite the negative text. Do not infer the present update cadence or retention rate.
Listing review source · Review ID 6527788073A displayed review can be old, unusually positive or internally inconsistent with its star rating. These accounts suggest questions; they do not establish current defects or typical customer experience. Use the Review Research Desk to keep evidence and interpretation separate.
A chat-style panel and army detail assume category knowledge.
Deliverable: Open with a genuine beginner-level base decision; verify the advice feature's actual role.
Creative brief and current-product checkThree village states compress the progression detail.
Deliverable: Enlarge one supported upgrade and its meaningful visible change.
Creative brief and current-product checkThe battle scene needs a clearer focal decision.
Deliverable: Show one authentic attack objective without implying typical success or progression speed.
Creative brief and current-product checkDoes moving the intact village-progression frame before the tactics frame improve newcomer comprehension and download conversion?
Check Apple’s current product page optimization guidance and custom product page guidance before configuring a test. Write your experiment brief.
1–3: thumbs down · 4–6: thumbs up and down · 7–10: thumbs up
The basics need a serious rethink.
Too many obvious things have been left unfinished.
There is a useful product here. The listing needs to show it.
Some basics work, but the opening wastes attention and under-explains the benefit.
There is usable creative here, but too much of the sales argument is left to the visitor.
Real strengths, undermined by meaningful gaps in the opening story or execution.
A clear, useful demonstration with specific refinements still needed.
The main promise is clear and supported. Refinement matters more than reinvention.
Clear positioning, thoughtful choices and very few loose ends.
An unusually clear, convincing storefront worth learning from.
An editorial verdict on the captured storefront, not a measured ASO score or an assessment of an agency’s private work.
No private analytics, search-rank dataset or internal keyword field was supplied. Review quotations are short excerpts; explanations are our summaries. App names and screenshots belong to their respective owners. We are not affiliated with Clash of Clans. Read our editorial methodology.
Your app. Your priorities.
Send your listing, market and the problem you want to solve. I’ll explain the scope and fee before work starts. Your budget should buy decisions, not a longer PDF.
Build a relevant keyword shortlist, plan your screenshot sequence or get help with the creative decisions.
