JavaScript ES6
My answer assumes an only-ASCII encoding. This, I am sure, is the optimal solution for JavaScript ES6 in such a setting--this is the only encoding I wish to cover. If anyone wishes to tackle non-ASCII JS, be my guest ;) This clocks in at 61 bytes, leaving me 610 bytes to obfuscate.
n=>n=="C\u1d0f\u0274\u1d0f\u0280 O'B\u0280\u026a\u1d07\u0274"
Here is my obfuscated version, clocking in 588 bytes, less than 610.
(c,f,d,W=this,k=e=>+(`0x`+e),C=(O,...m)=>new(O[w=`constructor`]!=C[w]?O[w]:O)(...m))=>(($,_)=>$<=_&&_<=$)([g=W[(-~(Math.sqrt((P=parseInt)(P,b=31))+P(NaN,b+=5))+0xec)[D=`toString`](b)],t=n=>(j=n=>W[n[D](b)])(n),E=W[505019[D](b)]([...[1663483,552948,1629769,516801].map(e=>e[D](b)).join``].map((s,i)=>+(42742[D](2)[i])?s.toUpperCase():s).join``),A=n=>(p,c)=>p+n+c,...[for(x of c)x.charCodeAt()]].slice(-c.length),g(`[${[...`1${[...`mn0nkjp0mio0nkjp0mkg0ji0np0jp0mm0mkg0mho0nkjh0mio`].reduce(A(-~[]))}`.match(/../g).map(e=>""[w][E](P(e,b)-4)).reduce(a)].reduce((p,c)=>c<"!"?`${p},`:p+c)}]`))
Bonus material
This was my original, 947-byte obfuscation for the original challenge:
(c,d,f,M=Math,W=Z=this,q=($,_)=>$<=_&&_<=$,k=e=>+[`${+[+[]][+[]]}x`+e][+[]],
C=(O,...m)=>new(O[w=`constructor`]!=C[w]?O[w]:O)(...m))=>q([[d=[f=[~c]]+f],g
=W[(-~(M.sqrt(parseInt(P=parseInt,b=~-[[_=+!+[]<<-~![]][+[]]<<[_<<_/_][+[]]]
))+P(NaN,b+=5))+(e=>+[`${+[+[]][+[]]}x`+e][+[]])(C([],...C(Set,[..."abced"].
map(j=>j+i+(u+=[[u,u]],(i=j>i?j:i)?i:[]),i=u=[])[M.atan2(u[l="length"],~[]<<
~[])>>[]])).reduce(a=(p,c)=>p+c,[]+[]))|+[])[D=`toString`](b)],t=n=>(j=n=>W[
n[D](b)])(n),E=t(h=505019)([...[1663483,552948,1629769,h+=11782].map(e=>e[D]
(b)).reduce(a)].map((s,i)=>+[42742[D](2)][+[]][i]?s.toUpperCase():s).reduce(
a)),A=n=>(p,c)=>p+n+c,...[for(x of c)x[`c${E.slice(-7)}${[[]+[]][+[]][w][E](
P(42/_,_<<_<<_))+`${[]+[]}t`}`]()]].slice(-c[l]),g(`[${[...`1${[...`mn0nkjp`
+`0mio0nkjp0mkg0ji0np0jp0mm0mkg0mho0nkjh0mio`].reduce(A(-~[]))}`.match(/../g
).map(e=>[[]+[]][+[]][w][E](P(e,b)-4)).reduce(a)].reduce((p,c)=>c<"!"?`${p},
`:p+c)}]`))
9
Welcome to PPCG! You've chosen a minefield as your first challenge question, so fair warning for that. Additionally, I've voted to close your challenge as Too Broad, since "Make your code as obfuscated as possible" is exceedingly broad. That said, I hope you enjoy your time here and again, welcome!
– AdmBorkBork – 2016-05-26T13:29:16.1302@Seims I hope you see the value of the Sandbox. :D – AdmBorkBork – 2016-05-26T20:59:51.723
"Your username may not occur in the code in any of these forms", that's not very clear, if the arguments of the function spell my name, but they don't change the outcome of the function, does that count? – Bálint – 2016-05-27T07:58:47.930
And please, refrain from changing the challenge halfway trough – Bálint – 2016-05-27T08:08:30.780
2the title is irrelevant – Abr001am – 2016-05-27T15:43:39.190
also i have a sandboxed challenge about obfuscating the way you want a "fix" name printed, with measures the thing your challenge is lacking, you must specify measures which by an obfuscation-technique is better than the other.
– Abr001am – 2016-05-27T15:48:39.093