Hard to see how it could be different. I know movies and such depict battles as everyone killing and dying left and right, but in truth even 50% of top estimates of Russian losses putting KIA at 8k is a completely catastrophic number in historical terms. Battle of the Bulge iirc had 500-600k US troops involved, resulting in about 20k dead on US side, and considered one of bloodiest battles in history. Russia mobilized 150k into Ukraine, and by all accounts has lost at least 8k KIA possibly many more. 5% KIA attrition indicated likely total casulties including injury/capture about 3x to 4x that, which is completely unsustainable in any scenario except desperate last defense of a homeland. And they hadnt even gotten into the real urban combat yet.

Shifting tactics from attempting to take the country to trying to take a province, or Oblast as I believe they are called there, shows that at least some rational thinking still exists in the Kremlin.

Regime change does seem possible in mid to long term. Troops that are sent into that kind of meat grinder unprepared, for questionable goals and most importantly - under incompetent leadership, are historically very prone to to taking up 'political activism' after their return home.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)