Well, talking about their 'focus' takes us down a blind alley. Real life isn't a Paradox or Total War game- most expansion into North America was done by private or semi-private entities, with the big military presence following. If the French are building forts in North America, so will the British as per usual.
But there's a limit to how far and fast you can expand. Settler colonisation is really, really expensive. By far the most valuable territories in the Americas were the Caribbean islands, and while Britain had the capacity to seize more Spanish and French possessions than it did historically, it will lose a lot of troops to yellow fever doing so.
Besides which, remember that most British expansion in India was done with Indian resources. Even if the British decided to embark on some vast campaign to acquire American territory, they wouldn't have much more ability to do it than in our timeline. In fact, American expansion will require much more commitment of blood and treasure from Britain itself, which means that a stronger Britain in the western hemisphere means a Britain less able to intervene where its core interests actually are: Europe.
Bottom line: No India means a much smaller British Empire. It will probably be much more focused on the Caribbean. It might acquire Cuba or Hispaniola, or even both- but if it does, it also loses the ability to trade colonial gains for European concessions which in the long run strengthens France.