This is a matter of personal preference.
Some people are gamers, they want to know everything in advance so they can plan their game to maximize their chance of winning.
Others prefer to play with limited knowledge preferring to develop their strategy to meet the conditions.

Personally I like the campaigns, you still have the basic knowledge of what was available to both sides without knowing exact time and location of enemy forces.

When I joined the club over 25 years ago there was a group that produced 'blind scenarios' for the Battleground games.
Both sides got a situation report and a pbem file with a password, you had no way of knowing what your opponent had or where it was coming in.
Unless you could break the coding no way to know the scenario conditions or even the OOB.
These required a lot of scouting and I found them a lot of fun win or lose.

Currently I'm playing the Gettysburg TSS scenario using Robert Frost's modified movement and fire values pdt.
Makes it a different game as the original scenario was designed for the standard pdt movement.
Robert's pdt has a little slower road movement and what I think is a better cross country system.
Since the scenario has not been modified for the new movement rates the arrival times are not historical.
Has made for an interesting first day, looking forward to seeing how the second day goes.

Everyone should do a campaign series at least once to give it a shot. It’s not for everyone but it might be for you. Only one way to find out! The biggest oddity is the lack of PBEM encryption which is a big issue for some people but not for others.