The Soviets don't have the capability to simply bull onto Berlin at this point. This is the Market Garden of the Axis-Soviet War, a turning point that never was.
Not really. There was a flank attack aimed at Zhukov's flank that while unimpressive from a military viewpoint led the Stavka to call back the offensive and seek to clear its flanks. The Soviets were no more able to launch a single strike than the democracies were, modern armies do best in sequential, staggered offensives.
According to Glantz in
this video, specifically after the 50th minute (and Glantz has extensively studied the Red Army in World War II) the idea that the Soviets had no capability to move on to Berlin at this point is a myth.
Apparently the reason for the Soviet pause at the Oder was to consolidate gains in Hungary and Austria specifically. Stavka gave orders to go to Berlin on February 2 and then on February 8 and 9 new orders came to halt. February 8-10 was also the time of the Yalta Conference during which agreements were made on spheres of influence and so on (except for Austria). Afterwards the Soviets transfer forces into Hungary throughout February and March. The Soviets take Vienna on April 13-15 and then the Berlin offensive starts April 16. During the time taken to take Vienna the Soviets also secured their flanks for the Berlin offensive.
So the Soviets could have gone on to take Berlin in February 1945. That would lead to major butterflies for the rest of the war. Hitler would have stayed in Berlin even if he ordered the evacuation of some of the government to the redoubt in Berchtesgaden. Maybe he would have killed himself sooner. Maybe he would have been captured by the Red Army. Either way, once Berlin fell the game would be up and Hitler's successor would have signed a surrender document with the Allies (not just the Western Allies) and the war in Europe would essentially be over by March, except for some mopping up operations. The Soviets would end up in Prague and Vienna anyway since by February/March the Western Allies are still around the Rhine.
The effects on the war in Japan though would be even greater. According the D.M. Giangreco in his book
Hell To Pay (which is okay, but I have found a number of problems with it) Eisenhower had not wanted to get involved in a protracted fight for Berlin anyway since it would have committed a lot of troops that should have been getting ready to be transferred to the Pacific. An end to major combat operation in Europe in March 1945 instead of May 1945 would:
- mean that a lot of American troops who in OTL had gained enough points under the
Advanced Service Rating Score and been discharged would fall short in this TL meaning that more troops would be available (and available earlier) for the Pacific campaign.
- the Soviets lose less soldiers in the battle for Berlin and probably other campaigns and as a result of the Tehran and Yalta agreements would be in a position to enter the Pacific War earlier (they promised to enter the Pacific War within 3 months of the end of the war in Europe and did so in OTL) - in TTL they could enter the Pacific War in June 1945.
- the British would have more troops to transfer to the fighting in Southeast Asia. So perhaps we see an earlier Operation Zipper.
Do we see an earlier invasion of Japan? Who knows. Would an earlier invasion of Kyushu (say in July/August) work? Perhaps. But then with an earlier collapse of the Nazis and with the Japanese working out the invasion beaches anyway, the Japanese are likely to start reinforcing Kyushu earlier. An earlier invasion of Japan though probably means all those Allied POWs scattered across Asia get executed.