My responses against popular opening choices as white (Suggestions?)

Stafford Gambit: I transpose into the Halloween Gambit (Probably the least sound opening in my repertoire, but the Stafford is so rare that I don't mind playing it risky against it)

2. Knight c6: I play Bc4, if my opponent responds with Nf6, I go for the Knight attack/Fried liver attack. If they play Bc5 I go with the Evans gambit.

Knight Attack/Fried Liver

Evans Gambit

Sicilian Defence: I go for the Alapin Variation of the Sicilian, trying to keep the opponent playing to my cards. 

Alapin Siclian

Pirc: I go for the Byrne Variation, which includes a very nice trap, as well as just generally forcing the opponent to backpedal and play in a confined position. 

(Game where I got a player with the opening trap)

Pirc, Main line, Byrne Variation

French: Advance variation so far, although the French defense is extremely rare at the 1100-1300 range.

Advance Variation?

Caro-Kann: Somewhat undecided on my choice against the Caro-Kann. I learned a little bit of theory on the Hillbilly attack, however my most common choice is the Fantasy variation, which leads to a tactical game, or if my opponent denies the pawn exchange just leads to a huge space advantage for white

Fantasy Variation

Hillbilly Attack 

This is my opening repertoire as white. Leave some suggestions!

i think your choices against bc5 and nf6 in the italian are rather contradicting. with the evans you play for the initiative most of the time, while with the ng5 line you hold on to the pawn most of the time. if you want to improve your play with and against the initiative this makes sense, but otherwise i think 4 d4 against the 2 knights is a more consistent choice, or maybe something else but certainly in keeping with trying to play for the initiative at the expense of some material.

against the petroff 3 d4 is possible. i don't know if black can play in the style of the stafford here. it is a main line but so are your choices against 2..nc6.  i don't like the halloween. you shouldn't avoid an objectively bad opening by playing one yourself, especially if you are willing to enter main lines in some parts of your repertoire.

i find the fantasy much more difficullt to play for white than 3 e5 or 3 nc3/nd2. that's just my opinion.

if you play the advance french you might as well advance in the caro. it's not the same of course but  you get to play and understand the pros and cons of having the bishop on c8 or f5. however if you want diversity in the pawn structures or even positions you are getting, then 3 nc3/nd2 is there, and to a lesser extent 3 cxd5 heading for a panov or a pure exchange caro.

It's really funny you have a designed line for the Stafford. Even funnier you do a Halloween countergambit. Like I can't think of a better way to troll Stafford gambit players. Of course straight up refuting the gambit is more sound play but meme-wise this has to be the absolute best response.

haha, yea I haven't gotten around to learning the refutation of the Stafford properly so I just play the Halloween gambit for the rare circumstances people try to play it against me

I actually find that I get to play pretty aggressively with the Ng5 line, of course you're right in saying that generally the circumstance is I'm up a pawn and am looking to maintain the advantage, but the reason I enjoy middlegames that arise from that opening is because of how open the board is, allowing tons of tactics, where I thrive. I love setting traps and setting up tactics on an open board.

it looks like you're not entirely sure about your choice against the French and for good reasons, the slow struggle of the Advance French makes every French player happy as they like the easy target on d4 and the space disadvantage they have doesn't really bother them that much usually. In conclusion, I think the Advance is hard to play as White and is not in line with your repertoire choices (with a great center come great responsabilities) so allow me to recommend the principled 3 Nc3 French where the center isn't as fixed and you can enjoy many attacking chances against the Classical with 4 Bg5 or defend a slightly passive position but up a pawn against the Winawer

To be honest the reason I'm not sure yet is because I'm studying my openings against the more popular options first. I've only faced the french perhaps 3 times. I think to the advanced french because sometimes the Alapin Sicilian can transpose to it, but I would love some more agressive options against the french.

I think the french advance is a good choice for you if you are ambitious about improving- sure it leads to very typical french positions, which is a good thing as it will allow you to learn this important pawn structure (you will definitely lose a few games initially as your centre crumbles, but so what? this is how you learn). I have been hearing about how "pleasant" for black it is since when I started playing chess, yet it has remained the highest scoring variation in my repertoire (including my best ever over the board long time control win against a 2250 rated master). But sure Nc3 or Nd2 are also fine.

I would agree that Ng5 in the 2 knight is not a great choice at your level. You will definitely not get the "open boards with tons of tactics" if the opponent plays in a vaguely competent way (unless you count tactics that involve your king gettign murdered).

I like that you are going for the Alapin- against tame play from black you will just get nice playable positions with a solid centre, and against more knowledgeable opponents you will usually get either a pawn on e5 (so yes there might be some thematic resemblance with the advance french, although straight transpositions will be uncommon) or an IQP which is another pawn structure you will benefit from learning.

You might want to consider something against the Pirc that is less of a one-trick pony trap and can instead work against both the pirc and the modern- for example 150 attack style setups with Qd2 Be3 O-O-O h4 etc which can work against both.

The mention of the stafford made me smile- wouldn't worry too much about that one

     As a longtime French player I can assure you that  3.Nc3 is the most aggressive line for white. Yes, black can play 3....dxe4 but the Rubenstein leaves most the play to white. And the Winawer is the sharpest and most double-edged French variation, well suited to someone who likes the Evans Gambit and other lines you cite.

Ok that makes sense I guess, personally the French is the Defense I face the most because I play OTB the same person many times at the point I can almost consider myself an "expert" of the French Tarrasch, I like the positional game with few weaknesses and the solid center which gives good prospects in the endgame but I've found that 3 Nc3 leads to more quick wins

Against the pirc, the Byrne variation is actually a main line, and I only get the trap if black plays Ng5 instead of knight back to d7. I like the position for white, and I might change my options later, since I'm currently working on theory against the Sicilian and learning to play 1.d5 against d4.

The King's Indian attack is also very interesting to play against the french

Against Petroff defense, since you like gambits I'd recommend checking out and trying urusov gambit... you only sac a pawn instead of a knight but it's fun to play and there's compensation and quite often transposes into fegatello you enjoy playing

Don't get me wrong it's a decent way to play and you can totally go for it- just be mindful that you will need something entirely different against the modern (d6 g6 without Nf6) which at my level is actually more popular than the Pirc it seems (your experience might vary).

My general assessment of your first repertoire is: I like it a lot because it is made by "real" opening (no unsound gambits, no "London or Colle against everything") which follow classical principles and has internal consistency because in most lines you are aiming for an advantage in the centre.

I would see it as a very good repertoire  for someone who is serious about improving in the long term, and because of that I would tweak a couple of things-

- I think Ng5 in the 2 knights is not consistent as in the main line you give up centre and initiative for material, and more importantly it can lead to a pure memory contest in some lines (eg if someone who known what they are doing ever replies Bc5, the Traxler counterattack, and you have not looked at it before, I can guarantee you have already lost the game)

- I think it would be nice to get some experience in the Yugoslav-like way of attacking the fianchetto bishop with the Qd2 Be3 h4 formation- which is why I would look into the 150 attack against the Pirc/Modern. This is mostly about "futureproofing" your repertoire- one day in the distant future, if you keep improving, you will most likely want to try the open Sicilian, and you will then be grateful that you already known for to handle this sort of position when trying to leant the Yugoslav attack against the Dragon. If you instead go for the Byrne variation, you have purely learnt that variation- you don't gain any particular knowledge that can be transferred to other openings later on.

I just noticed you have nothing against the Petroff (you probably don't see a lot of that at your level, but it's still a major hole)- Given your other choices I think a sound and consistent line you might enjoy is 

To round up the repertoire (and before you worry about the Stafford ) you probably want to have a think about how to meet the Philidor (respectable opening, easy to get a reasonable position against but not so easy to get a big attack early on) and the Elephant/Latvian gambits, both of which are more popular and a fair bit more dangerous that the Stafford (although again, nothing you should lose your sleep over)

These are just a personal suggestions based on what I think would maximize the learning value of your repertoire; your choices are objectively completely fine and at the end of the day you can certainly continue with then if you like the resulting positions.

Agree, every improving player should try the Open Sicilian-like positions at least once in their lives

Against the Sicilian I have been varying between options. Currently I've been thinking of experimenting with the Grand Prix attack or the Levinfish attack against the dragon sicilian. Against the Stafford I've learned the refutation or just a solid way to play, removing the halloween gambit from my repertoire. I don't have anything against the philidor yet, however I usually just play d4 and burst open the center when I see the philidor, and that usually seems to go well for me.

The Philidor is so passive that you can play general opening principles and expect a pleasant game. If you enjoy attacking positions like the Evans Gambit then I really entourage you to try the Yugoslav Attack (I would be available to play it as Black) as you may fall in love with the razor-Sharp positions! Your attack is stronger than a regular Evans Gambit but the main difference is that Black is active and will get a counterplay of his own

If you want to refute the Stafford then just play Bc4 and go for a Urusov Gambit  and from their just play Nc3 and if Bc5 go d4 and countergambit the pawn I've won many daily games after 5.d4!!! / 7.d4!!!  in the Guioco Piano !

If you want to refute 2.Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 same thing as above go for Nc3 and then hit em with d4!!! a countergambit that restricts blacks play and possibly even prevents castling although if I were black after Nc6 Bc4 I'd go d5!!! doing the reverse to white !

If they play 3.Bc5 I'd go for d4!!! the Italian Gambit which can transpose into the Scotch Gambit or the Haxo Gambit 

If you want to refute the Sicilian I'd go for 2.Nh3! the Brick Variation and then play f4 Nf2 g4 h4 and expand all the pawns carefully !

If you want to refute the Pirc Defence I'd go for h4 the Petruccioli Attack or Bc4 to attack f7 ! 

To refute the French , I'd go c4 the Steiner Variation of the French and if c6 then d4 and if d5 then I'd either go exd5 cxd5 and go to a Caro-Kann Defence : Panov Attack or play it like a Slav Defence : Diemer Gambit and go 4.Qa4!!!

To refute the Caro-Kann I'd go for a Caro-Kann Defence : Labahn Attack with b4 and then treat it like a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with d4 and c4 !

as in e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 d5!!!

Refuting an unsound Gambit with an unsound Gambit? A little contraddiciting isn't it? And do you realize that against 3 Nf6 in the Italian if you play 4 Nc3 Black has 4 Nxe4 when he has equalized already?

I don't understand why you would respond to a post without reading even a single line of the post. I am completely aware of that. I play 4.Ng5 or 4.d4

Please read the post before answering, especially if you're going to answer without any helpful information