Select an opposing agent to view detailed head-to-head statistics. Compare Chamber's performance in terms of win rate, KDA, damage output, headshot percentage, and attack/defense effectiveness — all based on real competitive Valorant match data.
Compare against an opponent
Chamber
49.1% WR
VS
Veto
47.3% WR
Who Wins the Chamber vs Veto Matchup?
Winner
Chamber
Matches: 55
49.1%
Win Rate
47.3%
1.28
Avg KDA
1.18
16.5
Avg Kills
15.4
15.0
Avg Deaths
15.1
141.6
DMG/Round
136.5
29.5%
HS %
30.7%
213
Combat Score
201
52.1%
Attack WR
50.5%
49.5%
Defense WR
47.9%
Chamber vs Veto Performance Breakdown
In the Chamber vs Veto matchup, Chamber demonstrates complete superiority across all four key performance categories. Based on 55 analyzed matches, Chamber outperforms Veto in fragging efficiency, damage output, and both attack and defense win rates. This comprehensive advantage makes Chamber the statistically favored pick when facing Veto in ranked Valorant matches.
Fragging Power
1.28Chamber
1.18Veto
Fragging capabilities are closely matched between Chamber and Veto, with KDA ratios of 1.28 and 1.18 respectively. This near-parity means mechanical skill and positioning will often determine which agent comes out ahead in direct duels.
Damage Output
141.6Chamber
136.5Veto
Chamber outputs 141.6 average damage per round, edging out Veto's 136.5 ADR. This consistent damage advantage helps Chamber secure more assist credits and finish weakened opponents, contributing to overall team success even when not landing the final blow.
Attack Side
52.1%Chamber
50.5%Veto
Attack-side performance is balanced between these agents, with Chamber at 52.1% and Veto at 50.5% win rates. Success on attack will depend more on team strategy and map control than individual agent selection.
Defense Side
49.5%Chamber
47.9%Veto
Both agents perform similarly on defense, with Chamber posting a 49.5% win rate and Veto at 47.9%. Defensive success in this matchup comes down to crosshair placement, utility timing, and team communication rather than agent-specific advantages.
The Chamber vs Veto matchup in Valorant is a close matchup with a slight statistical edge. Based on 55 competitive matches analyzed, Chamber wins 49.1% of the time compared to Veto's 47.3%, a 1.8 percentage point difference. The most significant gap is in fragging ability, where Chamber consistently outperforms. In this Sentinel vs Sentinel matchup, Chamber holds a minor advantage, but Veto can absolutely secure rounds through good positioning and utility timing. The difference is slim enough that coordinated team plays and winning key aim duels can flip the matchup.
Chamber vs Veto Fragging Analysis
Chamber claims 4 out of 5 fragging metrics in the Chamber vs Veto matchup, establishing clear mechanical superiority with advantages in KDA efficiency, kill production, survivability. Our analysis of 55 ranked games reveals Chamber consistently outperforms Veto in direct combat scenarios. While Veto manages to win the remaining metric, the overall picture favors Chamber in gunfights. Veto players should play around their one strength while minimizing exposure in areas where Chamber dominates.
Avg KDA
1.28Chamber
1.18Veto
Chamber holds a slight KDA edge in this matchup, recording 1.28 compared to Veto's 1.18. While this 0.10 point difference indicates Chamber tends to come out ahead in engagements, the gap remains small enough that skilled Veto players can overcome it through superior positioning, utility timing, or simply winning crucial aim duels. The data suggests Chamber's kit may offer marginally better tools for securing kills while staying alive, but Veto players shouldn't feel disadvantaged when taking fights in this matchup.
Avg Kills
16.5Chamber
15.4Veto
Chamber secures approximately 1.1 more kills per match than Veto in this head-to-head (16.5 vs 15.4). Over the course of a typical 20+ round game, this translates to Chamber contributing several additional eliminations to their team's efforts. The gap indicates Chamber's playstyle or kit provides slightly better kill-securing opportunities, though Veto can compensate through superior utility assistance, site anchoring, or clutch performances.
Avg Deaths
15.0Chamber
15.1Veto
Survivability metrics are nearly equal between Chamber (15.0 deaths/game) and Veto (15.1 deaths/game). Neither agent demonstrates a clear advantage in staying alive during these matchups, suggesting both have similar risk profiles and neither kit provides notably better escape tools or defensive utility against the other. Round outcomes in this matchup hinge on which player makes fewer critical positioning errors rather than any agent-based survival advantage.
DMG/Round
141.6Chamber
136.5Veto
Chamber applies 5.1 more damage per round than Veto in this matchup (141.6 vs 136.5 ADR). While not overwhelming, this gap compounds meaningfully over a full match: Chamber contributes noticeably more chip damage, assists, and near-kills that set up teammates. Veto can close this gap through better trading patterns, ensuring their damage leads to actual eliminations rather than just tagging opponents who then escape or get healed.
HS %
29.5%Chamber
30.7%Veto
Veto lands headshots at a slightly higher rate (30.7% vs 29.5%), providing a modest but meaningful advantage in time-to-kill during duels. This 1.2 percentage point edge translates to Veto more frequently one-tapping or two-tapping opponents before Chamber can fully react. Chamber players should counter this by avoiding predictable angle holds, using movement to throw off Veto's crosshair placement, and prefiring common positions to negate the accuracy gap.
Chamber vs Veto Attack and Defense Performance
Attack Side
Chamber
52.1%
50.5%
Defense Side
Chamber
49.5%
47.9%
Attack Side Breakdown
Chamber demonstrates a modest attack-side advantage over Veto in this matchup, converting 52.1% of attacking rounds versus 50.5%. While this 1.6 point edge gives Chamber slightly better site-taking capability, the gap remains narrow enough that skilled Veto players can overcome it through superior execution and team play.
The data from 55 competitive games suggests Chamber's kit provides marginally better tools for attack-side scenarios. This could manifest as slightly more effective entry utility, better post-plant stalling, or superior mid-round adaptability. However, Veto teams shouldn't dramatically alter their attacking approach — instead, focus on tightening execute timing, coordinating utility chains more precisely, and ensuring trades are happening when entries fail. Small improvements in team coordination can easily overcome a 1.6% gap.
When taking entry duels, Chamber holds a slight statistical advantage but nothing that should change fundamental approach. Veto players should still take confident entries when they have good information or utility support. The key adjustment is ensuring you're not taking unnecessary 50-50 duels — look for angles where you have an advantage through utility, information, or teammate support. Chamber can play slightly more aggressively on entries, knowing the statistics marginally favor them.
Chamber has favorable matchups against 11 agents and unfavorable matchups against 17 agents in Valorant. Chamber's strongest matchup is against Harbor with a 58.3% win rate. The most challenging matchup is Sage at 39.7% win rate. Use the table below to find specific matchup details and performance metrics.
Chamber matchup win rates and combat stats in Valorant (Patch 13.02)
Help us maintain accuracy! If you notice incorrect stats, missing data, or any issues, your feedback directly improves the quality of our data for the entire community.
Chamber's best matchup is against Harbor, achieving a 58.3% win rate. Chamber excels in this matchup through superior fragging ability and favorable utility interactions.
What is Chamber's hardest matchup?
Chamber's hardest matchup is against Sage, with only a 39.7% win rate. Against this opponent, Chamber should focus on team coordination and utility usage to compensate.
How many favorable matchups does Chamber have?
Chamber has 11 favorable matchups (50%+ win rate) and 17 unfavorable matchups in Valorant. Understanding these matchup dynamics helps you make better agent picks and adapt your playstyle.
How should I play Chamber in difficult matchups?
When playing Chamber in difficult matchups, prioritize team coordination, utility usage, and crossfires. Avoid isolated 1v1 duels against unfavorable opponents and look for opportunities to use Chamber's abilities to create advantages. Adjust your positioning based on whether you're on attack or defense.
What stats matter most in Chamber's matchups?
Key stats to analyze in Chamber's matchups include win rate, KDA ratio, average damage per round, and attack/defense win rates. High damage matchups favor aggressive play, while low KDA matchups suggest playing more supportively and relying on team trades.
MetaBot Desktop
Get MetaBot on your gaming PC
The desktop app is Windows-only — send yourself the link and install it next time you sit down to play.
In post-plant situations, Chamber's slight advantage likely stems from better utility for denying defuses or controlling retake angles. Veto should compensate by being more deliberate about post-plant positioning — take spots that offer escape routes or trade potential rather than hero plays. Stack post-plants with teammates when possible, and use utility efficiently to maximize delay time. The 1.6 point gap can be neutralized through smart post-plant fundamentals.
Defense Side Breakdown
Chamber shows slightly better defensive capabilities than Veto, winning 49.5% of defense rounds compared to 47.9%. This 1.6 percentage point edge suggests Chamber's kit provides marginally better tools for CT-side play, though the gap remains small enough for skilled Veto players to overcome.
When deciding site assignments, Chamber can slightly more confidently take solo anchor roles. Their 1.6% defensive advantage likely stems from better stalling utility, superior information gathering, or more effective site-holding positions. Veto should consider pairing with a teammate on their site rather than solo anchoring, or taking positions that allow early rotates rather than committing to extended holds. The advantage is small but worth considering in close games.
Chamber demonstrates marginally better retake capability in this matchup. Whether through superior clearing utility, better post-plant positioning, or stronger clutch mechanics, Chamber converts retakes at a slightly higher rate. Veto should focus on retaking with numbers — don't take hero 1v1 retakes against Chamber when you can wait for teammates. Chamber can be slightly more confident in isolated retake situations, knowing the statistics marginally favor them.
On eco and force buy rounds, the 1.6% gap becomes more pronounced as utility advantages compound. Veto should be more conservative with eco aggression against Chamber and prioritize saving for full buys where team utility can compensate for individual disadvantages. Chamber can play slightly more aggressively on force buys, knowing their defensive kit provides small but meaningful advantages even with limited economy.
Overall Side Analysis
Chamber holds clear advantages on both attack (52.1%) and defense (49.5%), establishing themselves as the superior choice in the Chamber vs Veto matchup regardless of map side. This consistency across both halves means Chamber doesn't need to play for specific sides or rely on winning a particular half to succeed.
Chamber's advantage holds across all map types and team compositions. Whether on attack-sided, defense-sided, or balanced maps, Chamber performs better. Veto teams should consider compositions that can cover their weaknesses — pair Veto with strong fragging agents who can carry during their difficult matchup encounters, and ensure utility supports Veto's positioning.
For ranked climbing specifically, Chamber is the objectively better pick in this matchup. If you're equally comfortable on both agents and frequently face this matchup, practicing Chamber provides a measurable ranked advantage. Veto players should focus on team play, utility value, and avoiding direct Chamber confrontations rather than trying to outfrag them.
The verdict is clear: Chamber wins this matchup on both sides of the map. The combined 3.2 percentage point advantage across attack and defense represents a meaningful statistical edge. Veto isn't unplayable, but faces an uphill battle requiring stronger team support and more disciplined play to compete.
Sentinel vs Sentinel Dynamics
Both Chamber and Veto fill the Sentinel role in Valorant team compositions. This role mirror means teams won't face composition issues from having both agents — the question is purely which Sentinel performs better in direct competition. Our data clearly indicates Chamber is the stronger Sentinel pick when these agents face each other.
In Sentinel vs Sentinel encounters, similar ability timing and usage patterns mean both agents often use their kits in comparable ways. The winner typically comes down to which player uses their abilities more efficiently and wins the mechanical duels that follow. Chamber's statistical advantage suggests their specific Sentinel kit translates slightly better to winning these mirror encounters.
Chamber vs Veto is a skill matchup with near-even win rates (49.1% vs 47.3%). Based on 55 matches, see which agent wins in KDA, damage output, attack rounds, and defense rounds to find your edge.
