Eli5: if Stalingrad was basically bombed to rubble, why did they keep fighting over it?

Question

The city was practically totally destroyed. Without infrastructure wouldn’t it have just been some pile of rocks on the Volga? Why did the axis not just set up shop a few miles down the river after destroying the city?

In: Other

Answer 1

I imagine there was some element of sunk cost fallacy. This would make it harder to do the rational thing and walk away.