That's a premium setup that should serve you well. Some comments about individual items, though you'll have to take into consideration that my uses and needs may be a bit different than yours:
- The tripod legs are essentially copies of the Gitzo Series 3 that I use. Simlar pricing, too, compared to the most similar, current Gitzo models. The TVC-34L is tall enough to use without a center column, which is very good. For the steadiest tripod it's usually better to not use a center column, though some come up short without an added column. No such worry with the 34L, unless you are really, really tall!
However, the 34L has 4-section legs. For compactness, that's great and about the most that is reasonably practical. But it will be a little less stable than the 33L with 3-section legs. 4-sections are also going to be a little slower to set up at or near full height, since there will be an additional set of locks to manipulate. Gitzo offers the same choices. Even more compact tripods with more sections are available, but can get pretty wobbly and might be sort of fussy to set up as a result. And there are ultra-stable two-section or even single section tripods, but they just aren't very practical to pack and take with you. So, it's a trade-off: four sections (or more) for the tripod to be as compact as reasonably possible, or three sections (or fewer) to be a bit steadier and a little faster to set up.
- The BH-55 PCLR ballhead I have not used personally. I use a Kirk BH1 tripod head on one of my Gitzos. It's rated about the same as the BH-55, which should handle just about anything you can throw at it. I am not wild about the lever-type quick release and would probably choose the BH-55 Pro instead. The reason I don't like a lever such as that, it's possible to snag it on something (for example a sleeve when moving around the tripod... or a branch when moving the tripod itself) and have it accidentally open. A screw-in fasterer like the Pro head uses is going to be a little slower to set up, but I feel better about it out in the field. I stopped using a set of tripod legs with lever-type locks, for just this reason. But with the levers on the legs they were more exposed and vulnerable than on the head, so this really is a relatively a minor thing. And, I don't know, maybe the BH-55 PCLR has a secondary button/lock that prevents accidental opening of that lever.
- Between the tripod and the head, you might want to consider a leveling base such as the TA-3-LB or TA-3-LB-HK. This makes setup much faster because you don't have to fiddle with the leg adjustments to get the tripod itself perfectly level. Just set up the legs "in the ballpark", then twist the column on the leveling base and quickly set it using the built-in bubble level, and you've got a level platform to work from. It's also fast and easy when you make a little adjustment to the position of the tripod and need to re-level it. With care that can be done without removing the camera and lens from the head.
Unlike some center columns, the handles of these levelers are short enough that you can still spread the tripod legs to drop the tripod to it's minimum height. Using my tripods for sports and wildlife, in particular, I really wouldn't want to be without leveling bases on my pods. Folks shooting video often want a leveler, too. The RRS leveling bases look like a good value. They are considerably less than current version of the Gitzo I use. RRS's "HK" version adds a hook at the bottom, from which you can hang a backpack or other weight to increase stability of the tripod. That's neat feature Gitzo doesn't offer. If you are shooting more sedate stuff, you might not need a leveler. It adds roughly one pound of weight to the rig.
A possible added bonus of the Gitzo leveler I use (and it appears the same on the RRS version), is a lever on the side that allows quick and easy loosening of the head, for swaps in the field without tools. However, I usually set mine pretty tight to minimize risk of accidental loosening.
- I don't care for L-plates. IMO, they are expensive and add bulk and weight to the camera. Or are fiddly to have to remove and reinstall frequently. Because of other things I use instead (see "gimbal" below), the L-plate is unnecessary for my purposes. Instead I use a standard camera QR plate such as RRS' BGE11 (5D3 w/o grip) or BGE11L (5D3 w/grip). However, if you are shooting a lot of panoramas and scenics, for you an L-plate may be a faster/easier means of re-orienting your camera from horizontal to vertical.
- Lens plates for 300 & 70-200... no comment, they are pretty simple and ubiquitous, except that you will want ones that are slightly long if you follow one of my other recommendations (see gimbal head, below).
- I'm not familiar with the 192 FAS, which appears intended for multi-shot panoramas and is used to set the lens nodal point precisely. It looks as if it might also be usable with short macro lenses (but wouldn't be usable with lenses with a tripod mounting ring, where the lens plate is oriented the wrong way for use with that platform), as a focusing stage. I don't shoot a lot of multi-image panoramas, so don't have a need for that sort of thing. But I do use a couple macro focusing stages (a Kirk and an older Minolta that's been adapted) to do something similar.
TS-E lenses such as your 24mm are useful for multi-shot panoramics, but I'm sure you know have pretty limited overlap capabilities. Essentially without moving the camera at all, you can get two shots with roughly half of each overlapping the other, only through the shift movement of the lens (shooting one image with the lens shifted all the way to the left and then a second image after shifting it all the way to the right, for example). So you still might want a nodal tool, to be able to swing the lens, if you want wider than is possible via a couple shots and the TS-E's movements.
- If shooting a lot of sports and/or wildlife with your 300mm, you might want to consider a gimbal head of some sort, perhaps a Wimberley Sidekick
or equivalent. This is used in conjunction with your ballhead, to give you gimbal head tilt and pan functionality with up to 500/4 and 800/5.6 lenses (400/2.8 and 600/4 are a bit too large and heavy, though some folks take the risk and use Sidekicks with them successfully.... It appears to me the 200-400/4 IS 1.4X will be in this weight class, too).
When using any type of gimbal, the lens needs to have a long enough QR plate to allow it to be carefully adjusted fore and aft to reach a point of equilibrium, where you literally can tilt the camera and lens with a light touch of one finger. Some adjustablity is necessary because the point of equilibrium changes when you add or remove anything from the lens or camera (for example, shooting with or without the lens hood... or with or without the strap on the camera or a second battery in a vertical crip). With this type of gimbal mount, the panning axis of the ballhead allows for smoothly swinging around to follow moving subjects.
The Sidekick and similar are smaller, lighter and less expensive than a full gimbal head. Also, you don't have to remove the ballhead and replace it with the gimbal head, which often requires a wrench and can be a pain in the arse out in the field. To fit the Sidekick or similar, simply tip the ballhead's platform fully to the side, slip the Sidekick into the ballhead's quick release, and tighten it in place. It's ready to use!
You'd find a gimbal most useful with your 300mm, though it also can be used with your 70-200 or any other lens with a tripod mounting ring (smaller, lighter lenses may not be able to balance as well on the gimbal as the big ones, but aren't hard to manipulate anyway). As an added bonus, notice how the Sidekick attaches to the lens at the side? Well, that allows it to also be used to set up a camera (especially if fitted with a vert grip) in vertical orientation (when used with a shorter lens that lacks a tripod ring). For me, that makes the L-plate discussed above, unnecessary. The full-size gimbal heads attach "cradling" the lens from underneath, which is necessary for heavier lenses, doesn't allow for this convenient, alternative use.
- I'd also suggest a bag for your tripod rig, making it much easier to haul around and protecting the rig in storage or bouncing around in the trunk of your car. Carbon fiber is strong stuff, but can be abraded and damaged. I just got a couple nicely-padded Hakuba SH200 bags (33" internal length) that accomodate my Gitzo Series 3 with a full size ballead in place, and an exterior pocket for accessories such as the Sidekick, etc. If you get the 4-section pod, it will be a little shorter than mine. There's some variation in ballhead height, too. You might until after you get your rig set up and can measure it, to choose the right size bag.
- I also use LegCoats or similar leg cover pads on my field tripods, further protecting them, but also much kinder to my shoulder when I'm moving the tripod from one place to the next and don't want to fully knock it down and put it in the carry bag. If you go with that particular brand, I suspect you'll need the 1348 for the 4-section 34L tripod, or would need the 1325 for the 3-section 33L. (These reference the old Gitzo models they were originally created for, and the RRS tripods are based upon.)
In conclusion, it's a heck of a lot of money to set up a tripod of this quality... but it's also pretty much a once-in-a-lifetime purchase and will handle just about anything you want to do with it. I still have and use a 30+ year old Bogen (now Manfrotto) beast of a tripod, that I used to lug around but am gettin' too old for that now. So it's relegated to studio use only and I've even added a set of rollers to it. One of my Gitzo 1325s (w/Leveler, BH1, Sidekick, LegCoats, case, etc.) is over ten years old now, has seen a lot of cameras come and go, and is still going strong.
Because of the wide interchangeability between brands and broad array of accessories made for these tripods, there can be some ways to economize a bit. I recently jumped on an opportunity to pick up another 1325 used (w/Leveler) and added a Chinese knock-off full gimbal head, Chinese knock-off of the BH1, LegCoats, case, etc. Even used it's a pretty expensive rig, but has worked out less than one third what it would cost for a new Gitzo and name-brand gimbal and ballhead. I'm shopping now for a center column specifically for low-level macro work.
). Thus I almost never have reason to extend even the 3-section 58" tripods fully... Nearly always set them up 4 to 6 inches short of full extension to bring the camera 
