When can I start playing e4?

I figured I'd ask this question as I see so many threads surrounding d4.  D4 is the only opening with white I have ever used and it has served me well.  Recently I had thought to abandon it as my level improved and with it more direct counterplay but was able to analyze my games and adopt new attacking techniques.  Although I like to play in my comfort zone and enjoy d4 I want to improve my overall chess game.  Would learning new d4 systems like QG or Catalyn sytem be good or would a Class A player reccomend that e4 is a neccesity and something I should already be far along with.

Don't play e4 because it will help you improve, play e4 because it is THE BEST. 

As with all openings, just give it a go. Even if you don't enjoy it, you learn what it feels like to play it as white, so you can get into the other guys head a little when playing against it.

my first go e4 was an Alipin anti Sicilian tournament. I had never played either and was 3rd in my pairing I managed to win all 6 games.  I suppose I can build on that when facing the sicilian which Im sure will be quite a bit.  I agree WhitePointer about knowing the enemy (my opponent)

when I review master games I see alot of e4, nf3, Bb5.  Is that a reccomended reliable system?

That would be the Ruy Lopez / the Spanish. It is one of the oldest openings. There was a period where it dominated all other e4 openings, because it gives a white such a lasting advantage that black would have to play very accurately to get even. It would be pretty hard to dismiss the Spanish if you are into e4.

my favorite move!  usually around move 7-12

You play d4 without knowing the Queen Gambit? That's unbelievable. QG is pretty much the heart of the d4 system.

It's up to you what you want to learn. There is no specific curriculum in chess. Different people takes different paths towards their chess improvement. In my opinion, familiarity with a wide range of openings is never a bad thing.

I am pretty much an e4 player although I am also familiar with other openings. I have recently hit a wall with e4. In my club, it is getting difficult to squeeze out a win from good players there with e4. This is not to say that e4 is inferior. On the contrary, having used e4 for ages, I can attest that e4 openings are solid and time-tested systems. The problem is that systems like the Spanish and the Italian are all very well documented and many people are already conversant with them.  It is difficult to win when they can reach half the middle game without any mistake. I have recently employed flank openings to throw them off a bit, and this strategy seems to be working for now.

Openings are very overrated at the amateur level.

I currently am balencing my live games as white with half 1.nf3 and 1.f4, and honestly, i get completely different types of positions, but my results.....exactly the same.

You should not change your openings because you feel like it: no, you should change them, because you are not completely comfortable, even after studying the ideas and lines behind the moves. Only after doing so, it is appropriate to change the opening in my opinion because you simply just are not acquiring the proper taste or sense of being comfortable.

It never hurts to know other openings, but it's not necessarily going to make you better. The important thing is to play the openings well.

It's not that I don't know the QG or its core principles I just don't play it.  On one hand you have the cpawn and the fact that I like to reserve it for a later time then move 2.  On the other hand if not moved on the 2nd move it is not the Queens Gambit.  Just wrapping one's head around all the openings and the idea that a system can be played by one side but initiated by the other was hard enough..  I took to the school of thought to learn one system and learn it well and through that system learn the core idea's of chess.  London for white (d4, bf4) and as black the pirc (or my version d6,{c6 or nf6 if 2.nc3}), before that alehkiene's D which I plan on returning to.   In response to d4 I'd play a reverse London but as you probably know that was a serious handycap..  Having recently had sort of a chess epiphany, I'm finding it easier to adapt to new systems and feel I'm ready to brake out of my comfort zone and take on some new idea's opening wise.  Where this will all lead is what I love about chess.  Win lose or draw I value the beauty and symmetry of the game above all else.. It's those rare games where you can't help but want to savor the positional multiplicities.. That and beating some 2nd rate patzer who thinks he's god's gift and is visibly shaken from the pressure you can tell by the random verbage and redenning of the forehead.. love it

It only makes sense to change when you are dull and boring if you hate dull and boring. Being comfortable out of the opening is more important than some .3 or .4 advantage gotten by opening prep with a lack of understanding of the position imo because confidence is there when you are comfortable.

This is the most underrated aspect in chess.

As much as i love opening studies and what not, most of it is for general knowledge and often not useful for the majority of my games. It is a nice overview and reference, but often not applicable since positions can be specific in their own ways.

Sure, having an opening system is fine, but at the end of the day it doesnt matter if you dont play chess positions you like.

For example, i take my opening repetoire after carlsen in that all i care about is getting a playable middlegame.

You should care about reaching a playable middlegame, rather than an advantage based game, chess is simpler this way, and more fun.

I have to say though, you have to do some opening study though to reach a playable position.

Not having some understanding of a position is not a good sign for you. You may simply get overrun.

Randomemory thanks for the input,, its funny you added that i was thinking more or less the same thing.  I agree for the most part you just need a solid open even some minor misteps can be accounted for. I can think of a few though where coming in completely unawares and its not just .3 but a full 3 points its gonna cost ya.. 

Something lately Im finding is that against better opponents where I play something that i think is sharp only winds up being more drawish.  I wouldn't say Im having trouble but i'm working on the art of delaying exchanges or maintaining complexities as sometimes small material advantages aren't always enough for a winning endgame.

Cool, I made the first page.

You had lost lately game in few moves as White, after 1d4 h5 - it means you should work over opening.

I like 1d4 2Nc3, and dislike 1e4. But i remember that 1d4 2c4 was important step to me in understanding openings.

If you want to improve openings, i have excercise to you.

1d4 d5 2c4 dxc4 3Nf3 and let's say Black is sticking to his pawn on c4 (by b5 or Be6 or other continuations). Can you find ways to punish Black? (Take pawn back with superior position or be so superior that you will win in no time having less material).