I went thru this in the last month.
1) Worth trying. There is compelling mathematical simulation analysis that oval rings are better. But the support for the idea from the upper tier of cyclists is more mixed. For every top cyclist that likes them, you'll find one that tried them and then went back to circular. So worth trying, but not a silver bullet.
2) Lots of ways to do oval rings so you have to do some research in order to decide. I found a study that ran simulations and found that that the best solution a) didn't exist, and b) was too radical to work with a front derailleur.
3) Oval rings have compatibility problems with cranks, especially cranks that measure power. 110BCD seems a bit more problematic than 130BCD. Over the course of a month I prob called OEMs a couple dozen times asking if this or that were compatible. If you call them up you'll find that their chainrings or their crank is a lot more compatible with stuff then their published compatibility charts indicate. Obviously tho you'll bypass compatibility problems if you get a Rotor crank or you do power via pedals.
4) Oval rings don't hose up your power data. Altho few mfrs of power measuring systems officially state "compatible with oval chainrings" the general perception is that it's a non-issue.
5) Rotor sells some spacers to help you tilt your front derailleur. Worth getting.
I did end up getting oval rings on a Quarq crank, I've not ridden on the set up enough yet to draw conclusions. In a couple weeks, I'll be recovered from a month lost to race recovery and various failing body parts, and I'll be able to do a ftp test that should give me some feedback on this scheme. What I can tell you, at this point, is that it takes only a couple minutes to get used to them.
Books @ Amazon "If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart