I won't pick your combination apart since we all have different approaches (most of which are perfectly fine), but I must speak up about the CAT fluid damper for two reasons: 1) CAT, and, 2) fluid damper.
1) A lot of CAT parts, specifically the ones with moving parts or which require some sort of assembly at the factory (such as a balancer or waterpump or rocker arms) don't seem to endure high performance applications. Today, I think that their solid parts (main caps, connecting rods, etc) are fine in many applications provided that they are fully measured and inspected prior to use.
2) A lot of aftermarket stroker kit companies will not warrant their broken crakshaft once they learn that you used a fluid damper. The warranty is automatically VOID. Here's is a quote from the SCAT website, for example:
DAMPERS WITH MOVING INERTIA WEIGHTS
A. Fluid, balls, springs, inertia rings with rubber O-Rings, etc. Can
you balance a wheel on your race car if the tires are flat???? How
can your rotating assembly be balanced if to quote one
manufacturer, “These units (Dampers) should not be on the crank
for balancing as the inertia weight may not be centered until the
engine starts.” NEWS FLASH!!!! Centrifugal force will always take
the inertia weight off center no matter what RPM. Your assembly
is never balanced. TELL TALE SIGN!!!! Metal transferred on nose
outside diameter and damper internal diameter . . . A fatigue crack
starts. SNAP!!!! The crank breaks
The above quote is not my personal opinion but is from the SCAT website, and they will point to it right before they show you the door.
If I were you I'd ditch the damper. That is my opinion.