No, you don’t seem to want to understand that the will-to-power is not a will to power:
“[According to Nietzsche,] power is not primarily something an organism wants or needs but something an organism is or has and must exercise. Will to power, then, is not a teleological principle but a dynamic force, like a stretched spring or a dammed river. The “willing” of will to power, Nietzsche writes, “is not ‘desiring,’ striving, demanding”; rather, it is “[t]hat state of tension by virtue of which a force seeks to discharge itself” (WP 668).” (Cox, Nietzsche: Naturalism and Interpretation, page 230.)
Now to be sure, in WP 668 it says: “That state of tension by virtue of which a force seeks to discharge itself—is not [an example of] ‘willing’.” But note the quotation marks: Nietzsche is arguing that “[t]here is no such thing as ‘willing’, but only a willing something: one must not remove the aim [Ziel, “goal”] from the total condition—as epistemologists do. ‘Willing’ as they understand it is as little a reality as ‘thinking’: it is a pure fiction.” (ibid.)
This comparison to thinking is helpful. It can help us understand that the goal Nietzsche mentions is not your “value”: it is not the goal which arouses the willing, but the “goal” is implicit in the willing—to power—, just as the thought is implicit in the thinking: it’s not that there’s a “thought” which arouses the “thinking”, but thinking is nothing else than thinking thoughts, just as willing is nothing else than willing a “goal”, willing-to-power, a force trying and discharging itself…
"Goal setting itself is a pleasure—in means and ends thinking, a mass of force of the intellect expends itself!
“Willing[:] a pressing feeling[,] very agreeable! It is the accompaniment of every effusion of force.
[L]ikewise, all wishing in itself already (wholly regardless of attaining)[.]”
(Nietzsche, workbook Spring-Summer 1883 7 [225-26] whole, my translation. Cf. Is the Will to Power also a Feeling (like the "feeling of free will")? - #2 by Zeroeth_Nature)