An In-Depth Look at 4X Strategy Monetization

For years, the 4X Strategy market has shown steady growth. At its core, the genre thrives on its four Хs: eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, and eXterminate, mixing resource management with large-scale tactical combat and a strong social backbone of diplomacy and warfare.

Just look at the numbers: in 2024 alone, IAP revenue in this segment reached $6.8B, and the trend doesn’t seem to be slowing down anytime soon. The genre already hit $3.9B in H1 2025, well on track to surpass last year’s benchmark.

Top 10 4X Strategy titles in H1 2025

At first glance, the 4X genre appears to be the perfect match for teams with strong budgets and large-scale ambitions. But the reality is more complex. When a genre finds major success, it’s time to take lessons: not just for direct competitors, but for the entire industry. 4X Strategy games are famous for many things, including smart UA, misleading ads, social mechanics, and LiveOps, among many others. But today, we want to focus on one of the most fundamental pillars of any mobile game: monetization.

By looking closely at the 4X market, we’ll explore the different strategies at play and answer a few key questions:

• What market trends stand out right now?
• How do the leading 4X games stage their monetization?
• What are the two key monetization strategies in 4X games, and how do they differ?
• Which best practices can you borrow to fuel your own projects?

And last but not least: what does the near future have in store for 4X Strategies and any new contenders stepping into the genre? For starters, though, let’s set the stage with a clear view of the market’s overall performance.

Market Overview and General Trends

After the slowdown in 2023, with revenue declining by 15% YoY, the 4X Strategy market bounced back strongly in 2024. This surge was mainly driven by two titles, Last War: Survival and Whiteout Survival, which still lead the genre’s growth to this day.

💡 While their influence is undeniable, our focus here lies elsewhere. For a detailed breakdown of these two survival giants, head over to our in-depth analysis.

Market growth in Tier-1 West & Tier-1 East markets

In H1 2025, the market’s total revenue grew by +28% YoY; again, this growth was largely driven by the very top titles: half of the genre’s total revenue is generated by its top 5 games—mostly the same top 2, really, if we’re being scrupulous—while the top 20 secure nearly 70%. Beyond the top 100, earnings are virtually insignificant.

Looking at market concentration, things are even more intense. Before 2023, about 40% of total revenue was associated with the top 5 titles. After Last War: Survival and Whiteout Survival had stepped into the scene in 2024, the top 5 games’ share has only been growing, already reaching 50% this year. The message is clear: barriers to entry are increasing, and the further you move away from the top 20, the lower the earning potential.

Top games’ share in the genre’s total revenue

Top titles set the bar high with extensive content, well-structured LiveOps, and carefully designed monetization—all in order to hold their ground. And this strategy pays off, as most of the market’s leaders have been around for years.

If we take a closer look at the Top 100 Grossing titles of H1 2025, only 15% of them were games released in 2024 or 2025. The biggest slice goes to 2022 releases with 19% (and you already know the two beasts behind it), while 2018 contributes another 13%.

The data highlights the persistence of long-lifecycle titles in the genre. Top 4X Strategies sustain high revenue thanks to their deep progression systems and constant content updates, and studios must design monetization layers carefully in order to balance retention and spending.

Long-standing market leaders continue to hold their ground year after year, making it harder for newcomers to break through—especially for western developers, as only 25% of their projects make it to the top 100.

H1 2025 top 100 grossing 4X Strategy Titles: distribution by region and release year

Most of the top-performing games in the genre are Eastern, as this region continues to lead the field. In fact, Chinese publishers alone account for more than half of the chart, with the rest shared by all other countries. Despite the dominance of established giants, new projects enter the market and carve out a loyal audience for themselves, proving there’s still room for fresh competition.

With this in mind, it’s worth looking more closely at how these games structure their monetization strategies, so let’s break down the key stages that shape monetization in the genre.

The early stage, which spans the first two weeks, aims to hook players without scaring them away. Monetization takes off with fast progression, encouraging discovery through generous freebies—all layered with light PvE, minimal PvP pressure, and early alliance onboarding. This phase usually features:

• First top-up offers and beginner bundles (urgent but generous)
• VIP purchases and growth bonuses (meant to build long-term value)
• Speed-ups and a second builder to sustain momentum
• Intro battle pass as a light growth accelerator

Premium Starter Bundle in State of Survival

The middle stage, which begins in week 3 and extends into the third month, deepens player engagement. It comes with extended timers, forced strategic resource management, and deeper alliance play as controlled PvP and tougher PvE roll in. At this point, studios choose a different set of tools:

• Event bundles tied to seasonal activities
• Daily/weekly bundles for steady efficiency
• Subscriptions for a reliable income flow
• Hero shards, gacha keys, and gear resources for growth and competitive play
• Customizable bundles
• Battle passes as a core retention driver

Growth Fund in Rise of Kingdoms

The late stage begins in month 4, when the game shifts to large-scale strategy with throne, capital, and cross-server wars and alliance supremacy, sustained by leaderboards, regular updates, events, and new heroes. The goal here is to sustain retention, and for this purpose, the studios typically use:

• Alliance/server war bundles to support competitive players
• Event bundles with resources also add novelty
• Battle passes, VIP, and subscriptions become permanent necessities
• Daily/weekly bundles as habitual, smaller-sized purchases to stack resources
• Cosmetics and prestige purchases needed for status
• Resource sinks (speedups, healing) as a daily necessity
• Hard currency becomes just another spendable resource to keep up with alliance and competition needs
• Customizable bundles become more important for optimized progression

Alliance Boost offer in King of Avalon

As you can see, the early stage features relatively “soft” monetization and lasts for a shorter period than later stages. Typically, however, these first few days are when players make their first purchases, with around 10 days on average between them.

At this pace, segmenting players by their spending potential within the first 30 days is critical. For example, on average, only 3% of users move from the “paid up to $100” segment to the “paid over $100” segment between day 30 and day 90. The vast majority of high-spending users reach this threshold within the first 30 days, and the overall distribution remains largely unchanged afterward.

Player segmentation based on spending potential

For most games, the early gameplay-and-monetization stage is decisive in shaping a player’s spending behavior. However, long-term monetization still matters, and every project approaches it differently.

Two Strategies Compared: Immediate vs Gradual Monetization

There are two main ways we see developers handling monetization. Some bet on early monetization, driving significant player spending from the very first sessions while still supporting LTV growth. Others choose a slower path, holding back on monetization pressure to avoid driving players away too soon and focusing on long-term spending potential instead.

Looking across the full player lifecycle, it’s not only about UI density or timing. The contrast between these two monetization strategies often extends into underlying design philosophies that define how spending is positioned within the player’s experience:

To understand if these aspects notably influence overall performance, we’ll take a few top titles that approach their monetization differently and compare their data side by side. For this research, we picked Evony, Puzzles & Survival, Rise of Kingdoms, Kingshot, Frost & Flame: King of Avalon, and Guns of Glory: Lost Island.

Looking at pricing strategies, many monetization elements in these titles overlap. For example, the median price of IAP offers often falls within the $7.99–$9.99 range across the genre, which provides a general understanding of the average paying user profile. Yet clear exceptions stand out, such as Kingshot coming in with the lowest median price, while Evony pushes the ceiling with the highest maximum price.

Pricing strategy comparison

🔎 Curious how other leading games price and present their offers? Explore AppMagic’s Monetization Intelligence for detailed pricing data with specified tags and screenshots, and level up your monetization strategy.

The specifics of monetization strategy and pricing can also be observed in user payment behavior at the early stages of in-game activity. The average check for first-time payments in some titles—like Rise of Kingdoms and Kingshot—is lower than for the subsequent purchases, while Evony, by contrast, aggressively monetizes users right from the start.

Average user spend per purchase

Even with noticeable gaps in pricing and early monetization tactics, conversion into repeat spend remains largely consistent across the leading titles. Kingshot stands out, but this pattern likely reflects the nature of its traffic: the game actively experiments with creatives and may be bringing in a broader but less targeted audience.

Conversion comparison

Is there anything else these games have in common? Absolutely. At the core of every 4X Strategy lies a hard-currency-driven economy. Through an endless cycle of earning and spending currency (both free and paid), players in a single session face two contrasting moments: shortage, which emphasizes challenge and limits session length, and currency excess, which creates the illusion of rapid progression.

Most popular IAP offers are built around hard currency—it’s the easiest to sell. And another key metric to watch is the purchase rate of basic hard currency packs. By analyzing top revenue-generating purchases of some titles that lean toward different monetization types, we discovered that over 70% of IAP revenue consistently comes from hard currency.

Revenue distribution

On the surface, these 4X titles may look quite similar, but what sets them apart is how they execute their monetization strategies. Now, it’s time to analyze each approach in detail, and trust us, there’s plenty to explore!

Immediate Monetization Strategy: Building Routine From the First Sessions

In certain 4X games, monetization is part of the scenery right from the start. Welcome packs, daily cards, and growth funds are usually introduced alongside the first buildings and troops, framed as “starter value” rather than a separate store.

The goal is clear: get the first transaction early, while excitement is at its peak. UI reflects this active monetization with an often busy HUD (“heads-up display”) loaded with notifications, event timers, and pop-ups with fresh offers.

HUD in Evony and Puzzles & Survival

These monetization layers are often supported by an accordingly rich and well-structured LiveOps calendar. Take a look at the Puzzles & Survival’s event calendar as an example: you won’t find a single gap! A dense mix of regular events—up to 15 running all at once—is complemented by seasonal milestones and various irregular and one-time events. This intense blend of events is designed not just to sustain retention, but also to convert it into revenue.

Puzzles & Survival LiveOps & Updates Calendar

In practice, this means that players rarely engage with a single system in isolation. Instead, they are constantly navigating overlapping activities where progress and spending in different aspects reinforce one another.

Yes, each monetized activity has its own progress bar and rewards. However, spending or progressing in one often feeds into another, multiplying the incentive to engage. Puzzles & Survival executes this method by layering a large number of special offers (with multiple price options to cover different segments) with seasonal passes, customizable bundles, and periodic offers.

Puzzles & Survival monetization features

Friction is built into the structure: single-build limits, long march times, restricted exploration. The paid workaround is never far from view. Some titles add financial meta-systems such as auction houses, gem banks, or gacha to create deep, ongoing spend sinks. Evony, for instance, uses Auction House to provide an additional layer of hard currency spend.

Auction House in Evony

Another thing to note about this type of monetization: rewards flow freely early on, but serve as a hook because they introduce systems that would later require investment to exploit fully. Free rewards chained with smaller purchases link into other offer progressions or unlockables, such as top-up and first purchase bonuses.

This results in an ongoing, varied monetization cycle. Offers shift with the calendar, and there’s always something to act on “right now”. Spending isn’t just about skipping waits: it’s woven into how the game unfolds each day. As we mentioned, social features are one of the main levers that push IAP. That’s why they are also front and center, making communal work and rewards an important part of progression.

Key Takeaways

• Many 4X titles apply the immediate monetization strategy by leaning on intensity: layered offers, overlapping events, and constant friction balanced with immediate paid solutions.
• Monetization features are smartly linked to each other, creating a system where progress and spending are directly connected. With free rewards as a hook, these games lure players into the ongoing loop of routine micro-spending.
• Constant flow of new content and social dynamics are the main levers that push IAP.

Gradual Monetization Strategy: Building Long-term Trust

Meanwhile, in other 4X titles, monetization takes a back seat, giving way to gameplay and narrative. Especially in the early hours, when it’s all about immersion into the story-heavy world and settling in: getting to know the base, unlocking key features, and finding the rhythm in your own “build → research → explore” loop.

Even at first glance, the contrast is clear, with a comparatively cleaner UI. The focus is on gameplay-relevant notifications rather than monetization banners. A horizontal layout provides more space for gameplay without overlapping it with side banners.

HUD in Rise of Kingdoms

At this early stage, heavy monetization could be a distraction, preventing players from deeper engagement, so the spotlight remains on the main core loop and narrative. The first serious prompts to spend usually appear only once the player has seen enough to understand the value of an extra build queue, premium hero, or faster timer.

Offers are more likely to appear at the completion of a major upgrade, building on the sense of progression and flow. For example, State of Survival strategically places the time-limited Hero Offer on day 7—after some significant progression is achieved—rather than rushing it. Timing is crucial, and the goal is to ensure players are engaged enough before converting them. The first offers are often relatively cheap, serving as a low-risk introduction before players encounter more substantial monetization steps.

Hero offer in State of Survival

The difference in monetization strategies echoes the contrast in the design of LiveOps as well. Events still carry a lot of weight, but they’re treated as distinct elements and have a relatively lower density. Fewer events run at the same time, letting players focus on each one specifically rather than overwhelming them with multiple activities.

A major server war or seasonal celebration brings new icons to the HUD, themed reward screens, and time-limited bundles. Outside these peaks, the interface is uncluttered. Offers stay in the shop or inside event menus, ready when needed. And some titles, such as King of Avalon, feature an event section that the player may choose to hide.

King of Avalon’s event section in the UI and its event calendar

This long-play approach also takes a different route with pacing. Pacing mechanics, such as the single hammer for building, capped exploration, or longer research times, become a part of the game’s natural tempo. Features like VIP unlocks or special bundles can be the “solution” to this, but they blend into the broader sense of progression rather than manifest as an urgent pop-up. Cosmetics don’t feel like a necessity, for they are positioned as extras earned through events and often come in the form of base skins or decor.

Games that rely on this type of strategy typically convert players with cheaper offers at early stages and only move on to notably higher prices later on. Generally, at this point, they usually run significantly fewer offers at once, but the monetization remains robust. It relies heavily on gem purchases and high-value bundles tied to legendary commanders, while seasonal passes and chain offers still appear every month. The difference lies in presentation: value is communicated through clarity and prestige rather than sheer volume of offers.

Rise of Kingdoms monetization features

This strategy makes spending feel optional rather than imposed. By integrating monetization into natural progression and milestone moments, it reduces friction, prioritizing immersion and retention without constant pressure.

Key Takeaways

• The gradual monetization approach shows how pacing, clarity, and narrative focus can drive monetization just as effectively as intensity and volume.
• Early game emphasizes immersion, not monetization. UI is cleaner, gameplay-first, with monetization accessed when relevant.
• Events are fewer but positioned as distinct and special, not overwhelming.
• Pacing mechanics create natural friction, while spending feels like a choice, which builds long-term trust and retention.

Taking Notes from 4X Games Monetization Strategies

While their monetization strategies differ in many ways, both approaches offer much to learn from. In this research, we aim to highlight features in regular gameplay that, despite being rare, significantly impact a game’s monetization.

1. Customizable bundles let players choose what they buy, picking from a set of currencies, resources, or boosts to assemble their own “ideal” bundle. They reduce the risk of buying unwanted items and increase satisfaction by giving the player a sense of control

In 4X games, they’re especially effective for advanced players who know exactly which bottlenecks they want to solve. They also double as a monetization “safety net”: should the player not be tempted by a themed event pack, a customizable bundle might just entice them. A good example of this simple trick is the “Exclusive Custom Bundle” in State of Survival, which provides a clear visualization of available slots to populate the offer and to encourage players to tailor their own pack of rewards.

Exclusive custom bundle in State of Survival

A few tips:

• Use a clean checklist or drag-and-drop UI for selecting items.
• Show total savings dynamically as players add or remove items.
• Provide preset recommendations (“Popular Choice,” “Top for Combat,” etc.) as shortcuts for indecisive players.

2. Dual-currency shops give players the flexibility to choose between spending hard currency (gems, gold, etc.) or real money for the same purchase. This flexibility reduces friction and makes spending feel more natural, as players can decide which resource they value more.

These systems create a bridge between free-to-play progression and direct monetization. A player who lacks enough gems is smoothly nudged toward a cash purchase, while those who hoard currency can still engage without feeling locked out. This dual pathway increases overall conversion rates and maintains satisfaction by giving players agency in how they pay.

Dual-currency shop in State of Survival

A few tips:

• Provide a clear toggle or tab system in the shop UI (e.g., “Buy with Gems” / “Buy with Cash”).
• Keep navigation friction low: one tap should switch between hard-currency and real-money views.
• Ensure parity in layout and presentation, so the switch feels seamless, not like entering a new store.
• Use subtle nudges and present both options without interrupting the flow.

3. Monetized login calendars are a well-established feature that might appear hard to innovate. Yet many games have recently refreshed the mechanic by adding a paid reward track, turning the login calendar into a battle pass of a kind.

Players can purchase the paid option and, for a limited time, receive extra rewards each day when they log in. This type of offer has a positive effect on retaining paying users, also serving as a suitable conversion point for turning non-payers into payers.

Login calendar in Whiteout Survival

A few tips:

• Use the login calendar as a trigger for first payments by giving players the option to unlock extra rewards at a low cost.
• Highlight the value proposition clearly: early in the game, players may not yet understand the importance of items, but showing tangible numbers helps them see the benefit.

Conclusion: Crafting the Winning Strategy For 2025 and Beyond

The 4X Strategy market remains one of the toughest segments for newcomers to break into, yet its volume and opportunities are worth trying. The top of the charts is occupied by publishers with years of experience, and player expectations of different audiences reshape monetization strategies.

Many top 4X Strategies build their monetization around weaving spending opportunities into every layer of gameplay and the LiveOps to convert players as early as possible—while the excitement is high. Other studios succeed by taking a more selective, prestige-oriented path that builds deeper engagement and long-term trust before any conversion begins.

In 2025, success is more likely to come from evolving the same old formulas than simply following them. For smaller teams or those without deep LiveOps expertise, this field is a risky bet, but it could be the perfect fit for studios with the resources and patience for a complex, content-heavy project.

And here’s what they’d have to adapt to keep up with the top titles:

• Blend 4X with adjacent genres: Use casual hooks, RPG-style progression or narrative depth, survival or MMO-like social play to reach broader audiences.
• Balance aggressive monetization: Operate transparently to earn player trust and offer optionality rather than pressure.
• Innovate in endgame and socials: Break the routine and give players reasons to stay invested for years.

On the bright side, high competition is driving constant experimentation, making the 4X market an excellent source of inspiration for your projects, especially when it comes to driving IAP. It’s not really about choosing between the existing monetization strategies, but about learning from the best and adapting one’s strategy to market realities.