• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The Hungarian 2nd Army was a total writeoff... sure an army of the same name was reconstructed, but most of the manpower and all of the equipment was lost.
(the German 6th Army was also reconstructed in that fashion)
The Hungarian 2nd Army was already known in Hungary as "The dead army" before Stalingrad. There were few illusions about them coming home intact, if at all. The majority of the Hungarian army was deployed along the Romanian border for most of the war, expecting Romania to take advantage of the situation to backstab the country. When Romania surrendered to the Soviets and its army was turned against the Axis, the expected attack did indeed materialize.
 
The Hungarian 2nd Army was already known in Hungary as "The dead army" before Stalingrad. There were few illusions about them coming home intact, if at all. The majority of the Hungarian army was deployed along the Romanian border for most of the war, expecting Romania to take advantage of the situation to backstab the country. When Romania surrendered to the Soviets and its army was turned against the Axis, the expected attack did indeed materialize.

Though that time the best equipped 1st Army was already in the Carpathian Mountains against the Soviets and the freshly raised 3rd Army and reformed 2nd Army was deployed against the Romanians. The 3rd Army performed badly, though the 2nd Army gave quite a fight ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Turda ).
 
If you included the most crulest and sadistics asshole of a great statesman of that era I shall agree with you.
Believe me, as a Pole I should be the last one to admire Yossip Vissarionovich. But objectively I just must admit that as the statesman he achieved the most, short of costs.
 
. . .

Are we still discussing military campaigns?

We should define largest in terms of the modern value of the territory and/or equipment used or taken. So for example the 2nd anglo dutch war was actually one of the greatest victories in history for the British, not a defeat. James K Polk was the most successful leader in human history, given what he accomplished in 4 years.

Why be merely slightly subjective when we can be absurd?
 
We should define largest in terms of the modern value of the territory and/or equipment used or taken. So for example the 2nd anglo dutch war was actually one of the greatest victories in history for the British, not a defeat. James K Polk was the most successful leader in human history, given what he accomplished in 4 years.

Why be merely slightly subjective when we can be absurd?

I concur the British lost their part in 1776 while the Dutch hold it till 1974. Decisive Dutch victory (and they got Euro Cup in 1988 partly as a result of deal). Or draw.