And for the OP's claim, this has the effect, that if a nation raises WT on purpose somewhere, ALL democracies and neutrals can get more active early. Guaranteeing Poland is one example, USA joining Allies another. The SU could abuse this to strengthen opposition to Germany, because as communists, they have less restrictions to diplomatic actions than democracies but share (probably) an enemy.
First thing. Just because IRL the Allies ended up fighting with the Soviet Union against Germany does not mean in 1936 they shared an enemy, or were friendly. A number of countries invaded the Soviet Union and tried to strangle communism at birth, that included USA, Japan, UK, France, Czechoslovakia. Other countries were dragged into the civil war (Poland, Romania), Finland and the Baltic States were formed out of it. Stalin had no reason to trust the Allies any more than Germany in 1936, and it's wrong to assume that the Cold War grew entirely out of events post-1945.
If the Soviets had gone on an invasion spree in the mid-1930s would the Allies have done nothing? It's claimed, without any evidence, that the Soviet Union could on it's own increase WT to around 90%, even though it's actions cause less increase to WT than other countries, and we know it is more interested in puppets than annexation. It should also be more interested in spreading it's ideology by political means.
Despite it's huge size, there are not loads of countries bordering the Soviets - Japan, Sinkiang, Tibet and Afghanistan in Asia. Despite how it turned out IRL in 1941, would the USA do nothing if the Soviets invaded and annexed Japan? More preposterously, why would the huge threat to their interests in the Pacific suddenly lead them to throw off the Neutrality Acts and DoW Germany because of the Anschluss?
Would the UK not feel threatened by Soviet actions in Asia? Remember IRL the Soviets kept Operation Zet a secret, because they thought that the Allies would strongly object to them interfering within China. There was a huge concern that the Chinese Civil War would lead to a communist revolution.
What about the Middle East? The Soviets border Iran and Iraq. Would the UK allow them free rein to invade and puppet these countries?
In Europe, it's possible not much would happen in the case of the Baltic States. But Finland, Romania, Poland and Turkey? Remember to get WT high enough for the US to enter the war will require several of these. Prior to the M-R Pact, Finland was regarded very much within the sphere of influence of Germany. It was Germany who sent troops there during the civil war. IIRC there was diplomatic agreements between them from before Hitler. Even to the extent that the Finland government thought Germany was their ally in 1941, because they didn't know about the secret protocols in the M-R Pact that gave Finland to the Soviet sphere of influence. Hitler claimed to Mannerheim that he didn't intervene in the Winter War because he was busy in the West, and his troops were not equipped for winter fighting. The Allies couldn't assist Finland because the Baltic Sea wasn't open, and they couldn't get an agreement for access through Sweden.
Do we really believe that in 1936-38 that the Soviet Union could invade and puppet Finland without either the Allies or Germany doing anything about it?
Technically it's true that the Allies could use this as part of a strategy to attack Germany, and in MP games that could happen. But in MP games Germany could DoW France in 1936, or instead of following the historic chain of NFs do the same sort of central Europe conquest that Daniel did in WWW, or Northern Europe and capture Sweden's steel and factories early in the game. But even in MP games, if you were playing as the Allies you would get pretty concerned that the Soviets could become unstoppable if you allow them to take over most of their neighbours. Turkey gives them access to the Med, even threatens Suez, Romania gives them even more oil and threatens the Balkans.
We are supposed to believe that the Soviet Union, despite their historic position of "socialism in one country" and Stalin's pre-occupation with dealing with internal matters, might go on an invasion spree, and that the Allies AI would respond to that by attacking Germany? Do you think they are hardcoded to fight Germany regardless of the situation in the world?
Surely, it's much more likely to lead to an informal alliance between the Allies and Axis against the Comintern? Followed by a very uneasy peace, especially if Germany and Japan use a peace conference to grab big chunks of a defeated Soviet Union.
When Daniel went on his invasion spree in central Europe did the Allies respond by attacking Germany or Hungary? And that must be the situation, whether the aggressor nation(s) are the Axis, a faction in South America, the Northern Lights, or Albania bent on World Conquest. Nothing else makes any sense, unless you are utterly paranoid that this game is about defeating Germany and nothing else.
The democracies are restricted from attacking countries that have not raised WT. That's absolutely not the same as they will always attack the countries that historically raised WT, and ignore everything else, nor even that they will always attack every country that raises WT.
