[White "LetMeWinPls45"] [Black "Nord1970"] [FEN ""] 1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. c4 b6 4. Nc3 Bb7 5. Be3 Nc6 6. Qd2 Nf6 7. Bd3 O-O 8. O-O-O e6 9. Bh6 Ne7 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 11. f3 d6 12. g4 c5 13. d5 exd5 14. cxd5 Nc8 15. h4 Ne7 16. h5 gxh5 17. gxh5 Ng6 18. hxg6 fxg6 19. Qh6+ Kf7 20. Nh3 Rg8 21. Ng5+ Ke8 22. Nxh7 Nxh7 23. Qxh7 Rf8 24. e5 dxe5 25. Bxg6+ Rf7 26. Qxf7# 1-0
Now, this is what I'm talking about when I say "attacking the kingside". Trade the fianchetto bishop and storm the kingside with pawns. If I can trade the h pawn, my rook and queen can team up on h6, the knight can jump to g5 to put an eye on h7, and the bishop on e3 is always putting an eye on g6-h7
I heard (though do not remember exactly) that Levy Rozman (a.k.a GothamChess) suggests this for White when Black plays this kind-of the King Indian's defense setup.
But I also heard some theory saying that Black is the one who should storm the kingside and White should storm the queenside instead.
So, what are the advantages and disadvantages of attacking the kingside? And is it a good game plan?