Yes, but the problem is that you can’t have that in RTS games at all, so you don’t need to balance the two worlds at all.
And also, the correct thing to say would be: “AoE3 had a progression system but it wasn’t complex at all to where players could just ignore it and still win against a player who does focus on it AND STILL FAILED”… Which goes to further prove the first point. Because, let’s be honest, AoE3 is pretty much dead for a long time and it never was near the level of AoE2.
If you want progression system then you need to play a game based on that, where the main idea of the game is to level up your avatar, like in Lineage 2, WoW, Guild Wars etc. Or play Clash of Clans, because thats the closest you can ever have a game which somehow resembles a strategy game with a progression system.
Whereas in a real strategy game, the main idea is obviously to strategically or tactically outsmart the opponents (apart from some needed APM), so any progression system just makes the very concept of these type of games pointless, and you are most probably interested in completely different game genres without realising.
.
.
.
I would also like to point out the fact why forced progression systems are harmful for multiplayer competitive games, and having in mind that these usually go hand in hand with microtransactions sooner or later, why we (especially since the AOE community is quite mature and knows how good games used to be) should be so vocal about these kind things which brought the industry into the appalling state it is today which seems to be regarded as “the new normal” today. There are the very recent examples of Destiny 2, Middle-Earth, Star Wars Battlefront 2 which prove the exaggerated greed and illegal (crates/gambling) practices the big companies are coming up with. We need to make sure Microsoft doesn’t follow this route with AoE4, or else we will all be very disappointed.
Make no mistake, the success of an RTS game on a large scale is ultimately dictated by its success in multiplayer PVP, which is arguably even more important then mod support. A progression system will throw away all this by making it unfair and making the very concept of an RTS pointless as discussed earlier.
Not to mention that such a system also has the flaw of making the players that play more, hence already more experienced, even more powerful by also giving them better gear/stats, thus widening the gap even further. As if coming home from work and wanting to play a fair game for which you paid full price not possible because you didnt “unlock stuff” wasn’t enough. It makes no sense in competitive shooters, it makes absolutely 0 sense in RTS games.
Adding microtransactions as well to that, into an AAA fully priced title, is absolutely inadmissible and inexcusable, and you should take the responsibility of criticizing such practices immediately. That is where forced progression systems sooner or later lead to, don’t be fooled.