Against e4 the big 4 are e5 c5 c6 and e6 against d4 what is the equivalent? Nimzo-QID? grunfeld? QGD? slav/semi-slav?
The reason why King Pawn openings have the "big 4" is that with e4 unprotected when advanced and d4 protected, by the queen, it is easier to get d4 in later than e4, and so Black must immediately fire at the White Center, attacking either e4 or d4 immediately without giving White a free shot at owning the center without weakening e4 or d4. d4 can later be guarded by c3 while e4 can later be guarded by f3. So an ideal center with d4 and e4 and Knights on f3 and c3 is something that must not go undisturbed as otherwise White will simply dominate the entire center of the board.
Now you might say "Well, doesn't the Alekhine and Scandinavian disrupt White's center? It does, but it leaves Black with no solid foundation and instead sees black making multiple moves early with his knight or queen. The "hypermodern" strategy is not all that terribly strong against the 2-pawn center.
However, the moment you add a third pawn to the mix, the square that the middle of the three pawns occupies has been severely weakened. The pawn itself may not be weak as it might be able to easily advance, but the square is permanently weak.
For example, take the Kings Indian Defense. After 1.d4, 1...Nf6 says "White, you are not getting e4 in as well." White says "OK, I play 2.c4 instead. Now after 2...g6 3.Nc3, White says "Hey, what ya going to do now? I threaten e4!". Black can then say "Nothing, I play 3...Bg7 because now if you play 4.e4, with c4 already played, the d4-square will be permanently weak, and yes, you can advance d5 when I attack you with ...e5, but then the dark squares in the center are weak for White, and especially d4. If I can get a knight there safely, your days are numbered!"
The Nimzo-Indian sees Black use the pieces to prevent e4, which is possible because e4 starts off unprotected. The same cannot be said for d4, and so using pieces instead of pawns to stop central domination is not as effective against 1.e4 as it is against 1.d4.
Therefore, a pawn push to cover a central square like e4 or d4 is not essential, and that either control of e4, or the weakening of e4 or d4 such that Black can take over control of it, is sufficient.
Now there are 3 moves that stop e4 early on. 1...d5, 1...Nf6, and 1...f5. None of these are refuted, but advancing the f-pawn does weaken the King and is SLIGHTLY (not heavily) inferior to the other two.
So just remember, the hypermodern approach is not very good against the 2-pawn center, but is effective against 3 or more pawns as then squares are weakened, usually the square or squares occupied by the pawns not on the edge of the horizontal chain, do if White has pawns on c4, d4, e4, and f4 (KID - Four Pawns Attack), the squares e4 and d4 are weakened in White's camp.
Therefore, the openings that follow that principal of either preventing e4 or else controlling weakened squares by a hyoermodern approach, the follow are really the "Big 6" against 1.d4, with other openings possible, but like the Alekhine and Scandinavian are against 1.e4, they are just a tick inferior to the big 6, though not outright refuted.
The Big 6 includes:
The Queen's Gambit Declined
The Slav
The Semi-Slav
The Nimzo/Queen's/Bogo Indian
The Grunfeld
The Kings Indian
Then a tier down from there you have the Dutch, English Defense, Modern Defense, Chigorin Defense, and Benoni structures.
Then bordering outright inferior are the Budapest, Albin, Nimzowitsch's Defense, etc.
And then lastly you have just the outright bad, like 1...g5, 1...h5, 1...Nh6, etc.
Against e4 the big 4 are e5 c5 c6 and e6 against d4 what is the equivalent? Nimzo-QID? grunfeld? QGD? slav/semi-slav?