Invasion Day 100 – Summary

The summary of the 100th day of Russian invasion to Ukraine, as of 22:00 – 3rd June 2022 (Kyiv time).

Day summary:

The 100th day of the Russian three-day invasion have passed, and the enemy hasn’t achieved any of its goals yet. Ukraine has still operational air force (in limited form), controls portion of Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts and repelled major assaults on Kyiv, Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv and Mykolaiv. Russian army captured one iconic city – Mariupol, one regional capital – Kherson and one nuclear power plant – Enerhodar.

Ukrainian troops continue to fight in Sievierodonetsk and despite the lack of heavy artillery and air superiority in the area, they’re holding out.

Russian army continues to target border areas of Ukrainian Chernihiv and Sumy Oblasts, looking for a weak spot in the Ukrainian defense.

Kharkiv Frontline

includes the area of Kharkiv and Chuhuiv

rain showers | ~27 °C

Shelling: Slatine, Dementiivka, Ruska Lozova, Verkhnii Saltiv, Pechenihy

There was no change on the ground in Kharkiv Oblast.

Siverskyi Donets

includes the area of Slovyansk, Kramatorsk and Bakhmut

light rain | ~33 °C

Shelling: Virnopillya, Dibrovne, Korulka, Dovhenke, Svyatohirsk, Yarova, Raihorodok, Shchurove, Staryi Karavan, Brusivka, Myrna Dolyna, Pokrovske, Zolote, Vidrodzhennya, Novoluhanske

Barvinkove direction

  • Russian troops attempted to break through Ukrainian lines towards Barvinkove, but they weren’t successful.

Slovyansk direction

  • The enemy assaulted Ukrainian positions near Bohorodychne and Dolyna. Ukrainian defenders repelled the attack and the enemy retreated.
  • Russian forces attacked in the vicinity of Studenok, Sosnove and Yarova. The fighting continues. Ukrainian Army noticed a higher usage of electronic warfare systems in the area.
  • Russian troops attempted to advance in the direction of Raihorodok, but they weren’t successful.

Sievierodonetsk direction

  • The fighting inside the city continues, primarily in the center district. Ukrainian forces have reportedly lured the Russian troops into the city and conducting a counter-attacks at this moment.
  • Russian forces attacked Metolkine, Bobrove and Ustynivka east of Sievierodonetsk, but the attacks were repulsed.
  • The enemy advanced in the area of Komyshuvakha, captured the western outskirts.
  • Ukrainian troops repelled attacks on Vrubivka, Nahirne and Bilohorivka.

Correction: Ukrainian staff reported shelling of Ukrainian positions at Borove, meaning the settlement is under their control. Given the terrain and swamps in the area, Oskolonivka might or might not still be in Ukrainian hands as well. I marked it as contested for now, until we get a confirmation from either side.

South-Eastern Front

includes Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia Oblast

partly sunny | ~34 °C

Donetsk Oblast

Shelling: Zolota Nyva, Marinka, Novomykhailivka, Pisky, Avdiivka, Kamyanka, Vesele

Russian troops attacked Krasnohorivka, but they weren’t successful.

Zaporizhzhia Oblast

Shelling: Orikhiv, Huliaipole, Poltavka

Ukrainian forces repulsed an attack on Poltavka.

Correction: The state of Novosilka is unclear. Neither side reported anything for at least a few weeks. I marked it as contested for now.

Kherson Frontline

includes the vicinity of Kherson and Mykolaiv

partly sunny | ~32 °C

Shelling: Posad-Pokrovske, Blahodatne, Mykolaivka, Trudoliubivka, Osokorivka

The situation at Davydi Brid is covered by the fog of war. Ukrainian forces have indeed crossed the Inhulets river using a pontoon bridge near Andriivka, but how far they advanced is unknown, even Ukrainian media cannot agree here. I decided to mark all three cities in the area as contested, and hopefully we’ll learn more in coming hours/days.

Ukrainian troops thwarted Russian offensive operation towards Kryvyi Rih.

Full map

The full overview map of current situation.

Maps and article are based on the following sources:

General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, official channels of Ukrainian regional administrations, Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), press released of Russian Army, DPR and LPR (taken with a grain of salt)

Visit our Deployment map for updated interactive map of captured areas and Ukrainian units.

Make sure to follow us on Twitter & Telegram for the latest updates on Ukraine.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

For the second or third time within a few days, the Charkiv Region administration has included victims from Balaklia in their daily report on the consequences of Russian shelling. The first time I thought they might refer to Balaklia Rayon, more of half of which is under Ukrainian control. But today’s reference is clearly to the town itself.
Regular Russian shelling of a town usually means that it is at least partly under Ukrainian control. Time for a closer look, and possibly a status update on your map.

Otherwise, the ISW has in their latest Campaign Assessment (June 4) now also taken up the issue of a possible Ukrainian bridgehead E of the S. Donezk around Khotomlya, maybe even Ukrainian control of the road leading there from Primorskoye further south. For the time being, waiting for additional information, they have just altered the status of that area from “Russian control” to “Russian advances”.
I feel you might want to consider some respective adjustment to your Charkiw Region map that signals that control of that area is hidden in the “fog of war”.


a.) N.G.Ruser, in his latest map update, sees Ukrainian control towards the immediate city limit of Balaklia. I.e., he has marked Pryshib, E of Balaklia, as Ukrainian controlled, and places Werbiwka into “no man’s land”.
Acc. to him, Khotomlya and Zarikhne are Ukrainian-controlled, with some “no man’s lands” around.
Nathan Ruser on Twitter: “Putin’s War — The Ukraine Briefing for June 5th. – Some Ukrainian gains in a counterattack on Sievierodonestk. – Ukraine withdrew from most positions on the N bank of the Donets River, with Russia moving forward. – SLIGHT UA gains near Davydiv Brid. More details below.” / Twitter

b.) NASA FIRMS shows (artillery?) fires yesterday/today slightly N of Buhaivka, and E of Symynivka. These are the next villages to the N of Zarikhne, on the road leading to Vovchansk, and might indicate fighting going on along that road.
Another fire appears S. of Pryshib, some 3 km E of the Balaklia outskirts.

While I am at it: Fires on the Kherson axis:
(i) SE of Velyka Olexandrivka, on the east bank of the Ingulets;
(ii) a few km S of Davydyv Brid and Lozove;
(iii) in/around Posad Pokrowske, and Ukrainka (Mykolaiw)

plus, expectably, in/around Lysychansk – Sievierodonezk – Metolkine, and Sviatohisrk/ Borodychne.


Thank you for your 100 days of summary!

Sievierodonetsk remains uncaptured today.  I thought it was impossible to hold a large Russian army with two poorly trained infantry brigades.  But things don’t always turn out as planned.  


It seemed that infantry troops, with good tactics and weapons, could still delay and even defeat armored attacks.  

Henry Whitworth

Take away Russia’s advantage in volume of artillery, get in close with their infantry, and it gets bad for Russia.

Henry Whitworth

Ukraine knew what they were doing by staying in Sievierodonetsk and taking this fight. They did the most damage previously on Russian forces when they had them in close for unit to unit fighting in the towns outside Kyiv. Here was an opportunity. They sit on the high ground across the river in Lysyschansk, almost certainly with 155mm howitzers trained down on those streets. They knew Putin would pay too high of a price for the symbolic victory of taking this city so they make sure he pays it. They fell back fairly easily for a couple of days as the Russians pushed a large force of their remaining infantry into the center of the city. Then they hit back. It’s a chance to attrite some of Russia’s only real infantry and it looks like they’re making good on that chance.

Reports yesterday put at least parts of the Ukrainian foreign legion in Sievierodonetsk. They’ve got more than two poorly trained infantry brigades taking part in the street fighting.


Again, you use Ukranian Telegram channels as a source of “truthful information”. Whether you like Ukraine or not, you can not use Telegram chanells run by Ukranian Ministry of Defence and treat it as factual. The same goes on to say about Russian telegram channels. Much of your sources are limited in evidence, and with constantly stating about “unsuccessfull” Russian attacks you are not actually helping the situation but rather misinforming your viewers. I am just asking to use information which is backed by facts, rather than presuming or fully believing one side whilst neglecting the other completely. An example of this :

Ukrainian forces repulsed an attack on Poltavka.
This is not true, since there was no attack on Poltavka, artillery bombardments do not mean there was an actuall attack in place.

Russian troops attacked Krasnohorivka, but they weren’t successful.
Once again this is not true, there was no attack on Krasnohorivka and from what I have found not even the inhabitants can confirm of this, no actual evidence to back this information up at all.

Again, I like this page and thank you for informing people of the situation, but please if you have no direct proof or evidence of certain information, especially that which you find on Telegram, do not treat it as factual but rather inform your viewers of it being “supposed” or “alleged”, or at least pose that certain battle area as contested.

Thanks for listening to my rant, keep up the good work.

Henry Whitworth

Sorry but if you’re treating information coming from the Russian government in a “Fair and Balanced” manner, you are already choosing to be misinformed. Once someone has lied that much you’re joining in if you pretend they are in any way a legitimate source of information that must be considered against other evidence.


John did not say that the information coming from the Russian government is “fair and balanced”. But it is not right to treat the information of the other side as facts. We also heard from the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine about the “ghost of Kyiv” and the 13 dead heroes of the Snake Island. And it wasn’t true, as it turned out later.

Henry Whitworth

In fact it was Ukrainian officials who shot down the myth of the “Ghost of Kyiv.”

“Ukraine Air Force Command has warned on Facebook that the “Ghost of Kyiv is a superhero-legend whose character was created by Ukrainians!”.
“We ask the Ukrainian community not to neglect the basic rules of information hygiene,” the message said, urging people to “check the sources of information, before spreading it”.

Some information coming out of Ukrainian sources has proven wrong and, more often, just exaggerated. But they have actually provided real information about what is happening to their country. Russian mouthpieces are as reliable as Hitler’s propaganda ministry or Baghdad Bob. Again, holding up these two sides as equally reliable or un-reliable is deeply misleading. Russia saying something is NOT evidence of anything besides Russia saying something. If you’re holding that up as a “balance” against any other sources, you’re taking part in lies.

This “Well to be fair to both sides” thing, when one side is a genocidal dictatorship, is exactly how the big lies thrive in plain sight so much of the time. The blatant liars are easy to shoot down. The “fair and balanced” reasonable liars are far more effective.


“Ukraine Air Force Command has warned on Facebook…” after a month of inflating this information in local and Western media. And what about the 13 killed heroes of Snake Island? This information was “a little exaggerated”?

Anyone can consider any source as propaganda or the only truth. But this is definitely not an objective analysis. In this case, you yourself become like those on the other side. You become a participant in the opposite propaganda. But that’s okay for a lot of people too.

Henry Whitworth

I mean sure, note if there is a serious element of doubt about any information given. That’s a fair point. But to claim that the drivel coming out of Russian mouthpieces is somehow evidence against anything else is just wrong.

And, I’m curious, what is your source for the information that the inhabitants of Krasnohorivka are saying that Russian troops haven’t attacked? That is some remarkably specific reporting. I’d love more sources for that kind of stuff.


Hey there. Firstly, information given by the Russian side or Ukranian side should both be treated with ‘a grain of salt’, you stating that the information coming out of “Russian mouthpieces” is somehow not evidence also is just blatantly ignorant, as regardless of your personal opinions both side provide information which must be taken in and accounted for, not ignored like what you seem to want to do.

Secondly, regarding the Krasnohorivka claim, I am not a reporter myself personally, however I sit around and look for any information coming first hand from the inhabitants themself. If you look at Donetsk Oblast Telegram channels or information sources (independent, non-biased sources which provide information on when and where bombing raids occur, battles occur etc) you often find information regarding a specific battle ongoing between forces. I have sweeped through many online installations such as these telegram channels, the internet itself, Pro-Russian and Pro-Ukranian sources and I have not found a single bit of evidence to say that an attack there has taken place, in fact, Donetsk oblast has not seen many battles in the past days, unlike the Lugansk Oblast. There is a rather tense situation sure, but no actuall battle has been seen to fully take place for a rather long time. Occassionally, it is possible that this applies to this case regarding Krasnohorivka, there are firefights between forces, most commonly which occur as a result of recon detachments being sent to a certain area, but not full battles. I am suspecting that this is the case for this village.

Finally, my point is that I am not the one meant to be researching the above information, but rather the Ukranian Ministry of Defence which made this claim. To state something as such, you need evidence and facts for example, destroyed vechiles or liquidated forces etcetera. nothing of which, has been provided. This is my case, which is not against this author of this map, but rather against the MoD of Ukraine as I have stated earlier.

Henry Whitworth

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

Matěj Cepl

You are arguing that the author doesn’t have enough evidence and then you claim he is wrong. Where is your evidence?

Michal Slastan

ruZZians are probing, and finding that they shall not pass. It is remarkable how their ambitions keep on shrinking. Now it seems they are capable of offensive operation on a front of no more than a couple tens of kilometers. I read on ruZZian media four days ago about how Sievierodonetsk fell and they control it no problem.

In my opinion what Ukraine army posts is close to factual. What ruZZian sources claim is a big fat lie. No wonder the author relies heavily on Ukrainian sources.


Thank you Jerome for responding, I will absolutely link any information I do find and send it to you if it could contradict or support anything stated here, thanks for the response. Keep up the good work 🙂

Henry Whitworth

You did contradict what was stated here. So what is the source?

“there was no attack on Krasnohorivka and from what I have found not even the inhabitants can confirm of this, no actual evidence to back this information up at all.”


I have stated it in one of the replies above. Please read before accusing me.

Henry Whitworth

Do you mean this?

” I have sweeped through many online installations such as these telegram channels, the internet itself, Pro-Russian and Pro-Ukranian sources and I have not found a single bit of evidence to say that an attack there has taken place, in fact, Donetsk oblast has not seen many battles in the past days, unlike the Lugansk Oblast.”

You realize, the source you’re giving is, “I read it somewhere.”


No. My source is the fact that there is an absence of any information regarding this battle in that area, even in groups where this would be discussed, if you do not believe me, prove me wrong? How can I prove the absence of information regarding a supposed “Russian failed attack”, prove me wrong by posing facts and evidence against the non existing information regarding this “attack” that occurred and then we talk. Not a single bit of evidence with things such as destroyed vechiles or units or etc. To make a claim that a battle has taken place initially, you need direct proof and evidence of this, which is absent in all public installations. This is what I am trying to come across to you, you however seem to ignore everything I say and instead, you choose to believe Ukranian Information which initially did not provide any proof! You ask me to prove that what is absent initially? To make statements as such, you need to first ask the claim holder, in this case the Ukranina Ministry of Defence, to actually backup their claims with evidence, then we can prove/disprove it. You asking me rather than them proves your negligence towards this subject since you are ignorant enough to believe one side which made a baseless claim, whilst not the other which is challenging this and actually asking for the evidence for this claim.


Whether you don’t find evidence about any information to confirm it doesn’t mean that info is not true.

Yes, maybe it is not true, why not, but maybe you didn’t find it because you didn’t look for it in the right place or just because it is not possible to get the info (I suppose nobody in this site has a Palantir at home…).

I would simply be left with a general idea of the situation.


Yes Jaime you are right, I do not have a palantir myself but would really like to get one 🙂 It is also why I put the ending on my initial statement about this map which stated :

“Again, I like this page and thank you for informing people of the situation, but please if you have no direct proof or evidence of certain information, especially that which you find on Telegram, do not treat it as factual but rather inform your viewers of it being “supposed” or “alleged”, or at least pose that certain battle area as contested.”


It is a good point, John, regarding using qualitative adjectives regarding movements; “reported” is my preferred.

One mechanism for determining the veracity of sources is looking at more widely agreed positions several days after a territorial position change is stated. This is one of the reasons Ukrainian military sources are used more often; they more readily confirm negative news that is subsequently confirmed. I rather suspect this is deliberate, as it is makes them a preferred source of information and giving the information away does not change the position on the ground. They are, however, less forthcoming regarding advances and as Russian sources are reluctant to declare negative news the “fog of war” rapidly descends.

The challenge for Russian official sources is to more open regarding negative news. Whether they are able to do that during the current conflict is doubtful, however it would be in their interest.

Using the method of viewing confirmed changes of territory several days after a statement is made, this site is doing pretty well.


The only sensible thing to do is completely ignore states which have no free press reporting and disseminate information purely for political ends. Their word on anything means zero. In many cases the information will even have a negative value (you know less by hearing it, by design).

That is not, however, synonymous with completely believing the reporting of the other side. Information from any group has to be interpreted with incentives in mind, but most entities from non-authoritarian governments do not have the use of deception and misinformation as one of their core reasons for existence. Their information may not always be great and will often have some sort of tilt (which intelligent people can incorporate into their interpretation), but putting resources toward the purposeful manipulation of information is typically not a founding principle of existence like it is with sources of Russian or Chinese information. It’s best to realize that with governments that disseminate propaganda, TRUTH DOESN’T EXIST. Whatever they say is expected to become the “the truth” for their cult followers (most citizens of their countries) without any concern whatsoever for meaningless concepts like reality. A Russian statement like Ukraine being run by a neo-nazi government is a good example of how meaningless the concept of reality is. From the moment Putin uttered words to that effect, it BECAME “true”.

Henry Whitworth

Bingo. That’s exactly the problem with being Fair and Balanced with a source that is crooked by definition. A dictatorship is crooked by definition and I’m disturbed that so many people supposedly living in the free world are having such a difficult time understanding this. Not exaggerating. I’m not annoyed. It’s genuinely frightening. The Fair and Balanced trick is undermining democracy itself.