Yes, the USSR and its citizens suffered a lot in WW II. Yes of course that set back USSR technological innovation.
Trying to weigh what state did more damage is not a useful metric. Recognising specific damage _is_ useful.
Here's an example of really bad stuff by the USSR government I'm intimately familiar with. Friends had their relatives deported to Siberia by the USSR. Twice. This happened during both USSR occupations of Latvia, in 1941 (before the nazis arrived) and 1949 (right after they were kicked out). Some of them died. Some people I've met now in their sixties were born in a Siberian gulag in the mid-1950's. They were not alone to suffer. A bit over 2% of Latvia's population was deported.
Does any other injustice somehow make that less wrong? No.
My comment wasn't about justice. It's about that when your country is basically destroyed: nearly all young men killed and the remaining population has their homes destroyed, you have all the industry and agriculture destroyed as well, it's very hard to make excellent consumer goods and personal computers for everyone. First, you need to rebuild the houses for the people, it's a lot of work. Then you need to feed the people. Then you need to restore the industry to give people jobs and prepare for the next inevitable invasion.
And BTW, despite all that, USSR invested a lot in development of those Baltic states like Latvia. Like really a lot. They were swimming in money compared to RSFSR or other republics (maybe only Georgia had the same level of allowance in the USSR). USSR built industry and power plants there, that they later happily sold for scrap after 1991. And closed fine nuclear power plant built for them by the USSR. Now they have no jobs, population is rapidly declining (during the "awful" USSR times it was growing), they have no energy. Good luck to them.
I think it was a mistake to invest so much in those states, one of the reasons for USSR decline. Russian people worked hard to make those Baltic states happy and now they are the most ungrateful nations saying only dirty words about USSR and Russia. Just as Georgia.
It seems the more you give to people, the more ungrateful they become. Just look at British/USA colonies: they still respect the master. E.g. Japan didn't invite Russia this year for the ceremony on the anniversary of US nuclear bombings. But invited USA. We joked: "Why the didn't invite us, but invited USA that bombed them? Because without USA this ceremony wouldn't even exist in the first place".
USSR never did anything good for Baltics - it created non-efficient factories and sent a lot of Russians to work there, while prosecuted most of the local pre-war elites.
In late 80s no one in USSR wanted to choose stuff from Latvia over imported goods.
When USSR collapsed Latvia got a lot of non-efficient factories with dated equipment and had to close them and also masses of Russian factory workers who where very hostile to new Baltic states.
"Russian people worked hard to make those Baltic states happy and now they are the most ungrateful nations saying only dirty words about USSR and Russia."
Trying to weigh what state did more damage is not a useful metric. Recognising specific damage _is_ useful.
Here's an example of really bad stuff by the USSR government I'm intimately familiar with. Friends had their relatives deported to Siberia by the USSR. Twice. This happened during both USSR occupations of Latvia, in 1941 (before the nazis arrived) and 1949 (right after they were kicked out). Some of them died. Some people I've met now in their sixties were born in a Siberian gulag in the mid-1950's. They were not alone to suffer. A bit over 2% of Latvia's population was deported.
Does any other injustice somehow make that less wrong? No.