there's no point in fighting any of the villains from Star Trek because they're fundamentally pretty dull unlike the Empire.
Big YMMV territory right here. The Empire is literally just Nazis in Space. People like them IMO for their cool drip, moustache twirling, and ability to unreservedly hate them without feeling guilty about it. That's pretty boring to me. Meanwhile Klingons are basically just Vikings in Space. Which seems pretty cool to me, and at least as cool as Nazis in Space. And that's just one faction among hundreds.
I'd also argue that the ability to 'easily understand' the capacity of Trek villains is probably easier than it is for Star Wars, since the body of canon in Star Trek dwarfs that of Star Wars, and you just have more frequent look at technical aspects of things. But that would also ask a Star Wars fan to watch 800+ episodes of Star Trek so that's probably not going to happen most of the time.
Also you forget that the Empire is the existential threat. At the end of episode 9 every single Star Destroyer has a planet cracking weapon (which I hate, but here we are). Unlike the atom bomb The Final Order / Empire would absolutely use it. They annihilated a populated planet once for no reason. They destroyed four (?) planets from across a galaxy through hyperspace. The Federation couldn't fight the First Order because it would be wiped out without a declaration of war, using weapons that can't be defended against.
If the ragtag remnants of the Rebel Alliance and the New Republic can band together to choke that threat in the cradle, why wouldn't the UFP be able to do so? Every moderately sized 24th Century Federation Starship has planet-cracking technology as well as a default, I don't really see why the UFP would be outmatched in this scenario. And most core worlds have planetary defense grids and shields that can effortlessly repel most weapons fire from the stray ship that comes into orbit looking to cause problems.
It also ties into the bit of Trek that annoys me. It's supposed to use sci-fi to explore the human condition, not tell stories where made up [SCIENCE] fixes the made up [SCIENCE]. There's no story there.
Also another very YMMV perspective. This formula that doesn't work for you, works extremely well for me. Because IMO there IS a story there, and it explores the fundamental basis of human nature.
Human beings are inherently afraid of the unknown. It's a survival instinct hard coded into our DNA to keep us alive. Having the unknown fly at us and imperil our lives is terrifying stuff. And it's very easy for people to give into terror or existential dread. But human nature also encompasses a curiosity and drive to understand. Figuring shit out is also a survival instinct that's just as much a part of who we are. And if we foster that drive, hone it, and don't let fear cloud our judgment, we can overcome fear and whatever unknown obstacles lay in our paths by making the unknown known, and sussing out how to neutralize those scary obstacles.
Like, to me, that is THE fundamental story of the human condition. These stories captured and enthralled my imagination as a kid and helped form my worldview. And I find this repeating story of the human condition a lot more interesting, meaningful, and meaty than The Hero's Journey. Because in reality, only a small number of people get to become epic heroic figures, but we can all find ways to contribute to the advancement of humanity/society in our lives.