Why Britain did not simply build more strike carriers

Why did the Royal Navy not build more Ark Royal-style strike carriers once it had defined the role?

Treaty limits, construction speed, and Britain's need for repairable ships favoured evolving the armoured-carrier design toward the combined ideal instead.

Once treaty limits eased, the Royal Navy could enlarge the armoured-carrier line instead of repeating an unprotected Ark Royal pattern. Implacable remained close to treaty dimensions because adapting an existing design got hulls into service faster than starting over. Audacious moved closer to the prewar ideal that combined a large strike group with protection, while the US Midway class reflected a parallel American desire. Britain's smaller reconstruction base made survivability especially valuable because damaged ships could be repaired more readily than replacement carriers could be built. British and American designs were converging toward similar large protected carriers from different industrial and strategic conditions.