Sigrun, the fact that Fokker didn't use the rounded/tapered tips and Albatros, Rumpler, LFV and others did is more likely explained by the fact that Fokker made single bay fighters while the others did mostly 2-3 bay 2-seaters. I would imagine the likelihood of ground loop increased proportionately with wing span. Sure this shape also is to be found on some fighters but I'd guess it was already to be found of that company's 2-seater designs.

As far as the designers making "pilot survivability" their primary design objective, I think you're overstading that case a bit. I still belief that the primary design considerations were those needed to win the Adlershoff competitions (and thus military production contracts): speed (primarily a matter of horsepower and the engine dictated much of the rest of the design), climb rate, and flight characteristics -- in the case of a fighter this meant maneuverably (i.e. "squirrlely but flyable") and in the case of an observer stable enough to fly over long flights but with enough maneuverabilty to get out of trouble. I also believe that reducing drag became more and more a conscious design goal towards the end of the war (compare the Albatros CV with the Albatros BI and II).

BTW, you state that they weren't "building a piece of furniture" -- well, actually that's what a good number of the workemen in the Albatros factories had been doing before the war! And that goes a lot way towards explaining the skilled woodwork and beautiful natural finishes on those monocoque fuselages.